MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7027166906

Bias study of the naive estimator in a longitudinal binary mixed-effects model with measurement error and misclassification in covariates.

2014· dissertation· en· W7027166906 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueMemorial University Research Repository (Memorial University) · 2014
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEstimatorObservational errorCovariateBinary dataBinary numberErrors-in-variables models
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When covariates in Longitudinal data are subject to errors, the naive estimates \nof the model parameters are often biased. In this research, we exploit a Dynamic \nBinary Mixed-effects Model using a Generalized Quasi-likelihood approach. Through \nsimulations, we shall study the patterns in the bias of the naive estimator of the \nparameters that ignores the errors in the covariates.

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)0.098
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.384
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.902
Threshold uncertainty score0.519

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0980.384
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.131
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.213 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
DomainMethods
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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMemorial University Research Repository (Memorial University)Same topicStatistical Methods and Bayesian InferenceFrench-language works237,207