MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399034923 · doi:10.57805/revstat.v16i2.240

Semi-Parametric Likelihood Inference for Birnbaum–Saunders Frailty Model

2022· article· en· W4399034923 on OpenAlexaff
N. Balakrishnan, Kai Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk Management
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInferenceParametric statisticsEconometricsParametric modelStatisticsComputer scienceMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cluster failure time data are commonly encountered in survival analysis due to different factors such as shared environmental conditions and genetic similarity. In such cases, careful attention needs to be paid to the correlation among subjects within same clusters. In this paper, we study a frailty model based on Birnbaum–Saunders frailty distribution. We approximate the intractable integrals in the likelihood function by the use of Monte Carlo simulations and then use the piecewise constant baseline hazard function within the proportional hazards model in frailty framework. Thereafter, the maximum likelihood estimates are numerically determined. A simulation study is conducted to evaluate the performance of the proposed model and the method of inference. Finally, we apply this model to a real data set to analyze the effect of sublingual nitroglycerin and oral isosorbide dinitrate on angina pectoris of coronary heart disease patients and compare our results with those based on other frailty models considered earlier in the literature.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Open science, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.325
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0060.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.343
GPT teacher head0.581
Teacher spread0.238 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207