MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412105016 · doi:10.1080/03610918.2025.2527161

On the maximum likelihood estimation based on one-shot test device data and the associated adaptive design

2025· article· en· W4412105016 on OpenAlexafffund
Xiaojun Zhu, N. Balakrishnan, Kai Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunications in Statistics - Simulation and Computation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVLSI and Analog Circuit Testing
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersXi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool UniversityNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMaximum likelihoodEstimationStatisticsTest (biology)Computer scienceMaximum likelihood sequence estimationEconometricsMathematicsEngineeringBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we develop iterative methods to estimate parameters based on one-shot device test data using maximum likelihood estimation (MLE) for parametric, semi-parametric and non-parametric models. The EM-algorithm has been widely used to obtain the MLE in a variety of situations. But, the discussion on the direct Newton-Raphson algorithm seems to be scarce. To fill this gap, we develop the iterative method based on the Newton-Raphson algorithm and the method of scoring, which could be used in many commonly used reliability models. We also suggest a method for obtaining initial values under different model assumptions. The derived information matrix is further used for the optimal adaptive design, a topic that has not been studied much. Monte Carlo simulation studies reveal that the proposed method converges quickly and that the initial values obtained through the proposed least-square method are quite close to the MLE and leads to faster convergence in turn, particularly with large samples. Finally, two datasets from the literature are used to demonstrate all the methods developed here.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.269
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.145 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunications in Statistics - Simulation and ComputationSame topicVLSI and Analog Circuit TestingFrench-language works237,207