Bayesian and influence function‐based empirical likelihoods for inference of sensitivity to the early diseased stage in diagnostic tests
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
In practice, a disease process might involve three ordinal diagnostic stages: the normal healthy stage, the early stage of the disease, and the stage of full development of the disease. Early detection is critical for some diseases since it often means an optimal time window for therapeutic treatments of the diseases. In this study, we propose a new influence function-based empirical likelihood method and Bayesian empirical likelihood methods to construct confidence/credible intervals for the sensitivity of a test to patients in the early diseased stage given a specificity and a sensitivity of the test to patients in the fully diseased stage. Numerical studies are performed to compare the finite sample performances of the proposed approaches with existing methods. The proposed methods are shown to outperform existing methods in terms of coverage probability. A real dataset from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ANDI) is used to illustrate the proposed methods.
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 | 0.002 | 0.129 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| 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