Integrating information from existing risk prediction models with no model details
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Consider the setting where (i) individual-level data are collected to build a regression model for the association between an event of interest and certain covariates, and (ii) some risk calculators predicting the risk of the event using less detailed covariates are available, possibly as algorithmic black boxes with little information available about how they were built. We propose a general empirical-likelihood-based framework to integrate the rich auxiliary information contained in the calculators into fitting the regression model, to make the estimation of regression parameters more efficient. Two methods are developed, one using working models to extract the calculator information and one making a direct use of calculator predictions without working models. Theoretical and numerical investigations show that the calculator information can substantially reduce the variance of regression parameter estimation. As an application, we study the dependence of the risk of high grade prostate cancer on both conventional risk factors and newly identified molecular biomarkers by integrating information from the Prostate Biopsy Collaborative Group (PBCG) risk calculator, which was built based on conventional risk factors alone.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it