MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408755504 · doi:10.1093/jrsssc/qlaf021

Bayesian inference for the Markov-modulated Poisson process with an outcome process

2025· article· en· W4408755504 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yu Luo, Chris Sherlock

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C (Applied Statistics) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Methods and Mixture Models
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOutcome (game theory)InferenceBayesian inferencePoisson processProcess (computing)Computer scienceBayesian probabilityPoisson distributionEconometricsArtificial intelligenceStatisticsMathematicsMathematical economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In medical research, understanding changes in outcome measurements is crucial for inferring shifts in health conditions. However, traditional methods often struggle with large, irregularly longitudinal data and fail to account for the tendency of individuals in poorer health to interact more frequently with the healthcare system. Additionally, clinical data can lack information on terminating events like death. To address these challenges, we start from the continuous-time hidden Markov model which models observed data as outcomes influenced by latent health states. Our extension incorporates a point process to account for the impact of health states on observation timings and includes a ‘death’ state to model unobserved terminating events through a Poisson process, where transition rates depend on the latent health state. This approach captures both the severity of the disease and the timing of healthcare interactions. We present an exact Gibbs sampler procedure that alternates between sampling the latent health state paths and the model parameters. By including the ‘death’ state, we mitigate biases in parameter estimation that would arise from solely modelling ‘live’ health states. Simulation studies demonstrate that the proposed Gibbs sampler performs effectively. We apply our method to Canadian healthcare data, offering valuable insights for healthcare management.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.369
Threshold uncertainty score0.716

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.301 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C (Applied Statistics)Same topicBayesian Methods and Mixture ModelsFrench-language works237,207