Kernel and Probit Estimates in Quantal Bioassay
二元反应生物测定中的核估计与 Probit 估计AI 解读 ↓
本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。
DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。
引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。
关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要研究生物测定的剂量反应估计,二元反应本身不足以归为经济学离散选择或因果推断。
二元反应生物测定中的核估计与 Probit 估计AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
A kernel method for the estimation of quantal dose-response curves is considered. In contrast to parametric modeling, this local smoothing method does not require any assumptions beyond smoothness of the dose-response curve and, in this sense, is nonparametric. In finite-sample situations, the kernel estimate of the dose-response curve is not necessarily monotone and, therefore, if the additional assumption of monotonicity of the dose-response curve is made, a monotonized version is discussed. Bias, variance, asymptotic normality, and uniform consistency, including rates of convergence of kernel estimates, are derived and applied to establish consistency and limiting distribution of kernel estimates of the EDα. Here, EDα is the effective dose at level α, that is, the dose where 100α% of the subjects show a response. The properties of the kernel estimated EDα are compared with the corresponding properties of the maximum likelihood estimator assuming the probit model. Practical application of the kernel method requires choice of a kernel function and of a bandwidth (smoothing window), and methods for global as well as local bandwidth selection are discussed. Another point of interest is the construction of confidence intervals for the estimated EDα. For the kernel method, two asymptotically consistent approaches are presented. These are compared in a simulation study, where the behavior of kernel and probit estimates of the EDα, α = .01, .05, .1, and .5, and of corresponding confidence intervals is observed for four different models (two probit models, one Weibull model, and one normal mixture model). The choice of different kernels and of local bandwidths was compared in another Monte Carlo study. The observed finite sample behavior of the kernel estimate of the ED50 was considerably better (gain of 40%-70% in terms of mean squared error) than that of the probit method under the two nonsigmoid models, whereas it was not drastically worse under the probit models (loss of 20%-30% in terms of mean squared error). Application of higher-order kernels and local bandwidth choice turned out to yield favorable versions of the kernel method. The results concerning observed coverage probabilities for the confidence intervals based on different approaches were more mixed.