Reduction in mean residual life in the presence of a constant competing risk
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
Abstract The addition of a constant ‘competing risk’ corresponding to an additional, usually less significant, source of failure, frequently improves the fit in reliability and survival analysis. This is often termed a ‘lift’, as the effect is to increase the hazard rate (HR) function by a constant, which does not, of course, change the shape and hence the turning points of the HR function. However, lifting the HR function does not, in general, mean lowering the corresponding mean residual life (MRL) function by a constant, and so the MRL turning points, unlike those of the HR function are not invariant. The MRL turning points are used in, for example, defining burn‐in procedures in reliability engineering, and determining premiums in insurance. Hence, it is of interest to examine the changes in the shape of the MRL function, and in the locations of its turning points, resulting from a lift in the HR function. We discuss these problems in detail, with reference to a number of common distributions in reliability and mortality modeling. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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