Timeline for Likelihood with random censoring
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2018 at 15:35 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackStats/status/984817468605652992 | ||
| S Apr 12, 2018 at 16:55 | history | suggested | Davide Giraudo | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
improvement of formatting.
|
| Apr 12, 2018 at 15:33 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Apr 12, 2018 at 16:55 | |||||
| Apr 8, 2018 at 17:48 | history | edited | kjetil b halvorsen♦ |
edited tags
|
|
| Apr 8, 2018 at 10:43 | comment | added | momomi | Let us continue this discussion in chat. | |
| Apr 8, 2018 at 10:43 | history | edited | momomi | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited body
|
| Apr 8, 2018 at 10:42 | comment | added | momomi | So the first one is the likelihood for a random sample when we do not know if the observed value was censored or not? But I would say that if we assume the censoring mechanism is random, we cannot say if the observed value is censored or not. | |
| Apr 8, 2018 at 10:21 | comment | added | Xi'an | There are two likelihoods presented in the question: one observed and one completed with the censoring indicators (which are not observed). The second one is useful for resolutions like the EM algorithm. | |
| Apr 8, 2018 at 10:19 | comment | added | momomi | I've edited the question to make it clearer | |
| Apr 8, 2018 at 10:18 | history | edited | momomi | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 2 characters in body
|
| Apr 8, 2018 at 10:08 | history | edited | momomi | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 2 characters in body
|
| Apr 8, 2018 at 10:07 | comment | added | momomi | I can't understand the difference between my solution and the approach used for example here : web.stanford.edu/~lutian/coursepdf/unit2.pdf ( section 2.1) . | |
| Apr 8, 2018 at 9:57 | comment | added | Xi'an | Yes, the likelihood is correct if the sample is i.i.d. | |
| Apr 8, 2018 at 8:11 | history | asked | momomi | CC BY-SA 3.0 |