The polytomous discrimination index for prediction involving multistate processes under intermittent observation
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
With the increasing importance of predictive modeling in health research comes the need for methods to rigorously assess predictive accuracy. We consider the problem of evaluating the accuracy of predictive models for nominal outcomes when outcome data are coarsened at random. We first consider the problem in the context of a multinomial response modeled by polytomous logistic regression. Attention is then directed to the motivating setting in which class membership corresponds to the state occupied in a multistate disease process at a time horizon of interest. Here, class (state) membership may be unknown at the time horizon since disease processes are under intermittent observation. We propose a novel extension to the polytomous discrimination index to address this and evaluate the predictive accuracy of an intensity-based model in the context of a study involving patients with arthritis from a registry at the University of Toronto Centre for Prognosis Studies in Rheumatic Diseases.
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 | 0.013 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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