Optimizing Sample Size for Accelerated Failure Time Model in Progressive Type-II Censoring through Rank Set Sampling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Survival data is a type of data that measures the time from a defined starting point until the occurrence of a particular event, such as time to death from small cell lung cancer after diagnosis, Length of time in remission for leukemia patients, Length of stay (i.e., time until discharge) in hospital after surgery. The accelerated failure time (AFT) models are popular linear models for analyzing survival data. It provides a linear relationship between the log of the failure time and covariates that affect the expected failure time by contracting or expanding the time scale. This paper examines the performance of the Rank Set Sampling (RSS) on the AFT models for Progressive Type-II censoring-survival data. The Ranked Set Sampling (RSS) is a sampling scheme that selects a sample based on a baseline auxiliary variable for assessing survival time. Simulation studies show that this approach provides a more robust testing procedure, and a more efficient hazard ratio estimate than simple random sampling (SRS). The lung cancer survival data are used to demonstrate the method.
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 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 | 0.090 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".