Ensemble methods for survival function estimation with time-varying covariates
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
Survival data with time-varying covariates are common in practice. If relevant, they can improve on the estimation of a survival function. However, the traditional survival forests—conditional inference forest, relative risk forest and random survival forest—have accommodated only time-invariant covariates. We generalize the conditional inference and relative risk forests to allow time-varying covariates. We also propose a general framework for estimation of a survival function in the presence of time-varying covariates. We compare their performance with that of the Cox model and transformation forest, adapted here to accommodate time-varying covariates, through a comprehensive simulation study in which the Kaplan-Meier estimate serves as a benchmark, and performance is compared using the integrated [Formula: see text] difference between the true and estimated survival functions. In general, the performance of the two proposed forests substantially improves over the Kaplan-Meier estimate. Taking into account all other factors, under the proportional hazard setting, the best method is always one of the two proposed forests, while under the non-proportional hazard setting, it is the adapted transformation forest. [Formula: see text]-fold cross-validation is used as an effective tool to choose between the methods in practice.
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 | 0.090 | 0.402 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 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