Breslow approximation for tied event times Created 2026-10-06 Updated 2026-10-14
When events occur at the same recorded time, the Breslow approximation to Cox partial likelihood uses the factor , where is the risk set and the event set. It approximates the ordering of tied events rather than treating their within-tie order as known.
Efron approximation for tied event times 2026-10-14
For events tied within a risk set, put , and . The Efron approximation to Cox partial likelihood removes the average tied-event hazard multiplier from the denominator at each successive event. Unlike the Breslow approximation for tied event times, it accounts approximately for depletion of the risk set within the group. Factors independent of can be dropped for estimation. This is an approximation for coarsened continuous event times, not a full interval-observation likelihood.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2001 iii Paper 28 4 b Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-14
These are separate data, so results from the randomized trial must not be carried over. First inspect the construction of the survival response: a command creating a survival time object must pair follow-up in months with an event indicator, whose death/censoring coding should be checked explicitly. A censoring time is not an observed death time. Stratified product-limit fits would then summarize Kaplan–Meier estimators for the dose groups before adjusted regression.
If the fitted command is a Cox proportional-hazards model with dose, sex and age, its specification isThere is no separate intercept estimate because an intercept is absorbed into the unspecified baseline hazard . With the stated coding, compares high-dose with low-dose death hazards at equal sex and age; compares female with male hazards at equal dose and age; is the hazard multiplier for a one-year age increase. A negative treatment coefficient would correspond to a lower fitted hazard under high dose. A hazard ratio is not a ratio of survival probabilities, nor directly a ratio of survival times. Under this model the survivor function is .
The coefficient standard errors, Wald ratios and exponentiated confidence intervals should be read together. The common large-sample interval for a coefficient's hazard ratio isGlobal likelihood-ratio, score and Wald tests assess the included slopes jointly; for exactly these three one-coefficient terms their reference degrees of freedom are three. They need not coincide in a small sample. The Cox partial likelihood uses the event risk sets; the fitted log-likelihood is not a full likelihood for an estimated baseline survival curve. The method for tied event times should be recorded.
Check the proportional hazards assumption using scaled Schoenfeld residuals and time trends; check the functional form of age, influential subjects and independent censoring. Dose-by-age or dose-by-sex interaction terms are scientifically possible but require enough information and a stated model comparison. Adjustment can alter a crude dose association, and the allocation mechanism here is not specified as randomized. No coefficients, confidence limits, significance results, exact fitted calls or diagnostics for this dataset are recoverable without the output sheet. The displayed model is an interpretation template, not a claim that it was the exact missing command.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2006 iii Paper 44 5 a Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-14
Since the observed times are ordered, the final risk set is . Its Cox partial likelihood factor is thereforefor either value of the last event indicator. Every earlier risk set and earlier event factor is unaffected by changing . Thus the entire partial likelihood as a function of is unchanged, not merely its value at one fitted coefficient. Its maximizing set, its score function and its Observed Fisher information are identical. In particular, any consistently chosen finite fitted is unchanged. The lone terminal event conveys no relative-hazard information because there is no other individual with whom to compare it.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2006 iii Paper 44 5 Solution 2026-10-14
Use the usual semiparametric Cox proportional-hazards model with observed covariates :The covariates are implicit in the question's regression fit, even though the displayed data notation only lists exit times and event indicators. Assume entry at a common origin, time-constant covariates, distinct observed times and independent censoring. Write and . Conditional on a single event at in its risk set, the chance that individual supplies it isThe baseline hazard cancels. Consequently estimate by maximizing Cox partial likelihoodFor example, the score and information of Cox partial likelihood follow by differentiation. Define , and . ThenWhen a finite identifiable maximum exists, iterate until convergence. The Observed Fisher information also gives the usual asymptotic coefficient uncertainty. Censored subjects enter the relevant risk sets, even though they supply no numerator event factor.
After fitting , estimate the cumulative hazard of the reference subject by the Breslow estimatorIts jump at an event is the observed event count divided by the total fitted hazard multiplier at risk. The estimate is an integrated baseline hazard, with hazard represented by a measure placing these jumps at observed event times. If a smooth ordinary hazard function is wanted, smooth these increments with a chosen kernel and bandwidth; differentiating the step function as an ordinary function would incorrectly give zero away from the jumps. The fitted individual cumulative hazard is over that individual's follow-up. The invariances below concern this Cox partial likelihood fit and this Breslow estimator; they need not hold for a fully parametric proportional-hazards fit or an arbitrarily smoothed hazard estimator.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2008 iii Paper 46 5 a Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-14
The Cox proportional-hazards model specifieswhere is an unspecified common baseline hazard and is the individual's covariate vector. The hazard ratio for two fixed covariate vectors is , constant in time. Assume independent subjects and independent censoring conditional on their covariates, and use the question's absence of tied events.
Let be an event time, its failing subject, and the risk set immediately before that time. In a short interval of length , the conditional probability that subject fails, given one failure among those at risk, isThe baseline hazard cancels. Multiplying the successive conditional event-identity factors gives the Cox partial likelihood for :This is a partial likelihood, not the full survival likelihood for the unspecified . Risk sets evolve with the observed history; the derivation uses their successive conditional hazards, rather than assuming the risk sets themselves are independent.
Define and . For component ,Differentiating again givesThus the score and information of Cox partial likelihood are the sum of event-minus-risk-mean contrasts and the sum of risk-weighted covariance matrices, respectively. The Hessian is negative semidefinite; the likelihood is concave, with strict identifiability requiring variation in the relevant risk-set covariates.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2009 iii Paper 41 3 b Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-14
Write the Cox proportional-hazards model as , where is the hazard multiplier and is the unspecified baseline hazard. At an untied event time , let be the risk set immediately before the event and its failing individual. With independent censoring conditional on the covariates, the conditional probability that individual supplies the next event, given an event at that time and the risk set, is obtained by dividing its instantaneous event rate by the aggregate rate:More precisely this is the limit of the conditional probability for one event in a short interval; simultaneous events have smaller-order probability in the continuous model. Multiplication of these successive conditional contributions gives the Cox partial likelihoodCensored individuals remain in each risk set until their censoring time but supply no numerator. Conditioning removes the baseline hazard; this is a partial likelihood for , rather than a complete likelihood for event and censoring times.
Ties require an observation model or an approximation. Suppose a recorded tie hides the order of continuous events, with no intervening entry or censoring. Put for the tied event set and . An exact marginal contribution for the coarsened ranks is the sum of the ordinary rank contributions over every possible order:For example, if fail together while remains at risk, the two possible orders giveThe risk set is depleted after the first of the two events. This expression concerns the missing event order; it is not the full likelihood of an interval in which the events occurred.
Convenient alternatives are the Breslow approximation for tied event times and the Efron approximation for tied event times:The first keeps the initial denominator at every event; the second removes an average share of the tied-event multipliers successively. In the example their denominators are and . These conventional partial-likelihood factors omit multiplicities independent of , which do not affect its estimate; they should not be mistaken for normalized probabilities of the unordered event set.
For genuinely discrete event times there is another exact construction. If individual event odds are proportional to , conditioning on exactly events gives the exact tied-set conditional likelihoodFor the same three individuals this is . It is not generally equal to the continuous-time rank sum: the assumptions differ.
Large tie groups make naive summation over orders or subsets impractical. Recursion helps with the subset denominator, and Breslow or Efron avoids exhaustive enumeration. However, extensive ties can also indicate that time is measured too coarsely for an exact continuous-time ordering to be a useful target.
For example, if patients are assessed only at annual visits, use one row per patient-year still at risk and model the probability of an event in that interval. A grouped proportional-hazards model follows directly by integrating the hazard over the interval, with covariates constant there:Fit the resulting person-period likelihood, with Bernoulli distributions for the interval event indicators and interval-specific intercepts. Many events in the same year are then ordinary observations rather than a combinatorial ordering problem. This requires a compatible interval-observation scheme and appropriate independent censoring; it avoids pretending that unobserved within-year event times are known.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2010 iii Paper 34 3 c Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-14
Set and absorb the common multiplier into . The model becomesIt is a Cox proportional-hazards model; the unknown baseline does not need a parametric form. The equality hypothesis is precisely . The absolute multipliers and have a scale ambiguity, but their hazard ratio is identifiable when both groups supply information.
For an untied event at , let be the risk set just before the event, and let be the subject who fails. The conditional event probability is proportional to that subject's hazard, so the common baseline cancels:Multiply these factors to form the Cox partial likelihood. One can maximize it and compare its maximum with its value at using a partial likelihood-ratio test, or use the corresponding score test.
Explicitly, with group risk-set sizes and observed event indicator for group 1, the score at zero and its information areUnder the null the event label has exactly this Bernoulli distribution conditional on its current risk set. Hence is the usual one-degree-of-freedom log-rank test statistic, with an asymptotic chi-squared distribution when and enough informative events are observed. Censoring can differ between groups, provided it is independent of event time within the conditioning model. If there are recorded ties, use the appropriate tied-risk-set version: for events the null variance contribution is .
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2010 iii Paper 34 5 a Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-14
Let be the risk set immediately before , conditional on the preceding history. Only its members can experience the next event. In a short interval , the conditional probability that subject fails is , whereas the probability of one event from the risk set is . Dividing and taking the small-interval limit givesIt is zero outside the risk set. The common baseline hazard cancels. This is the conditional event-label probability underlying the Cox partial likelihood. Conditioning at an exact continuous event time is understood by this limiting conditional-intensity argument, rather than as division by the zero unconditional probability of an event at a fixed time. We use the standard simple event process with no simultaneous events and independent censoring.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2010 iii Paper 34 5 Solution 2026-10-14
For the distinct observed event times , let and let be the risk set immediately before that event. The Cox partial likelihood isThe different risk sets already incorporate each event and any intervening censoring. Differentiating this log-likelihood givesTherefore a finite interior maximum-likelihood estimate from the Cox partial likelihood satisfies the first-order conditionMoreoverEach summand is the conditional event-covariate variance, so the partial likelihood is log-concave. If some informative risk set has unequal covariates, the curvature is strictly negative and an existing finite root is the unique maximizer.
The finite-interior qualification is necessary. With two at-risk subjects having covariates zero and one, suppose the subject with covariate one is the sole observed event and the other is subsequently censored. Then increases strictly and has its supremum only as ; the score has no finite zero. If every event risk set has identical covariates, the coefficient is instead unidentifiable and the score is identically zero. The displayed fitted-score equation applies to the regular case in which the proportional-hazards estimate is finite.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2013 iii Paper 32 6 a Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-07
Use one row per consecutive at-risk episode, retaining a patient identifier for dependence and an episode number for event order. In calendar time, the intervals are ; status is one if the row ends in a headache and zero if it ends in censoring. Patient 001 contributes
The fifth episode is censored, not a fifth observed headache. All rows retain . This start-stop recurrent-event data layout corresponds to the counting-process intensity in survival analysiswhere indicates that the patient is currently observed and eligible for a headache. Fit the regression coefficient by Cox partial likelihood using the resulting risk sets, and estimate the baseline cumulative hazard nonparametrically, for example by the Breslow estimator. Patient rows are portions of one history, not new independent patients.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2013 iii Paper 32 7 Solution 2026-10-07
Begin by defining the scientific target: prediction for a new patient, or estimation of adjusted covariate effects. Check event definitions, follow-up origins, right-censoring codes and any delayed entry. The analysis assumes independent patients and censoring that is noninformative conditional on modeled covariates. For fixed explanatory variables , the Cox proportional-hazards model iswith an unrestricted baseline hazard and coefficients constant over time. Report as the conditional hazard ratio for a one-unit change in the coded variable, not as a risk ratio or automatically a causal effect.
For untied event times, fit the coefficients by maximizing the Cox partial likelihoodThe baseline cancels within each event risk set. Use an appropriate tied-event method, such as an Efron approximation or an exact method for a genuinely discrete event scale; the Breslow approximation for tied event times is another explicit approximation. Numerical score/information methods fit the model, and inverse information gives conventional covariance estimates for independent subjects. Report coefficient estimates, hazard ratios, uncertainty and the coding that makes their interpretation meaningful. After fitting, the Breslow estimator gives , from which provides predicted survival.
Adequacy is broader than significance of coefficients. Inspect influential observations, deviance residuals and data errors. Cox–Snell residuals should have approximately unit-exponential survival under a well-fitting model, retaining the original censoring indicators; a cumulative-hazard plot of these residuals should be near the 45-degree line. This is an overall diagnostic, not a substitute for the functional-form and proportionality checks below. For prediction, assess held-out discrimination and survival prediction calibration at prespecified time horizons with methods accounting for censoring. A high concordance index alone does not establish good calibration or correct hazard structure.
Use bootstrap or held-out cross-validation that repeats the complete modeling procedure, including imputation, variable selection and tuning. Validation of only the final fitted coefficients understates overfitting from earlier decisions. Report any substantive lack of fit rather than presenting a single time-independent hazard ratio when the data do not support that representation.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2014 iii Paper 32 6 b Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-06
When the event comes from the one-covariate subject, the Schoenfeld function for a three-person binary risk set isHenceThese are limits where necessary. At a very negative coefficient the model assigns almost no event probability to the observed one-covariate subject, producing the largest positive discrepancy. At zero coefficient all three subjects have equal hazard functions, so the expected event covariate is and the discrepancy is . At a very positive coefficient the observed subject is predicted to have the event almost surely, so the discrepancy tends to zero. The function decreases strictly and stays positive at every finite coefficient: this one event alone favors increasing , while the other events in the complete Cox partial likelihood determine its overall estimate.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2014 iii Paper 32 6 Solution 2026-10-06
For an event at from subject , with covariate vector , define the Schoenfeld functionThe second term is the hazard-weighted mean covariate in the risk set just before the event. The Schoenfeld residual is this function evaluated at the fitted coefficient, . Calculate one residual vector per event, using every at-risk subject, including those who will subsequently be censored. There is no ordinary event residual assigned at a right censoring time.
The Cox partial likelihood score function is . At the true constant coefficient in a Cox proportional-hazards model, the conditional event subject is selected with weights proportional to , so each Schoenfeld function has conditional mean zero. If the coefficient varies with time, that centering changes. Plot residuals against event time or a transformation of it, smooth them, and investigate departures from zero. Scaled Schoenfeld residuals account for the risk-set covariate variance and can display departures in coefficient units; score function tests based on residual-time association provide a formal check. Risk-set composition affects unscaled residual variance, and the total residual score function can be zero by fitting even when a time trend is present.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2015 iii Paper 33 5 b ii Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-06
Let be age in years, the male indicator and the indicator for the Messiah group. The fitted Cox proportional-hazards model iswith an unspecified common baseline hazard. Its coefficients were estimated by Cox partial likelihood, using the Breslow approximation for tied event times. There are participants, recorded completions and four censored observations.
A higher hazard function means a greater instantaneous chance of completion among those not yet completing, so it describes faster completion rather than greater mortality. Holding gender and group fixed, an extra year of age multiplies the completion hazard by , about a increase. The 95% confidence interval is and the Wald test has , so there is little evidence of an age association.
Holding age and group fixed, male participants have a hazard ratio relative to female participants, about a lower completion hazard. Its 95% confidence interval is and . Under the fitted model this corresponds to slower completion for males. It is not a ratio of mean or median completion times.
Holding age and gender fixed, participants assigned to Messiah have a hazard ratio relative to The Kingdom, with 95% confidence interval and . This is strong evidence of a group difference, with faster completion in the Messiah group under the fitted model. Random assignment supports interpreting a group contrast as an effect of the assigned condition, subject to the assumptions about follow-up and censoring; age and gender contrasts remain observational associations.
Each printed statistic is the coefficient divided by its standard error, using an asymptotic standard normal sampling distribution under a zero-coefficient null hypothesis. The hazard ratio is , and its confidence limits exponentiate the coefficient limits. Proportional hazards assumes these covariate-specific hazard multipliers stay constant over follow-up, together with the specified linear age effect and independent censoring conditional on covariates.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2017 iii Paper 207 5 a Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-05
A proportional hazards model assigns individual the hazard function , where is the baseline hazard for multiplier one and is a time-constant hazard multiplier. In a Cox proportional-hazards model, for a covariate vector and coefficient vector ; ratios are constant whenever the baseline is nonzero.
Assume independent individuals, independent censoring conditional on the covariates, and no tied events. Immediately before an event at , condition on its observed risk set and one event in a small time interval. The individual event probability is , while the total is . Their limiting ratio is . Multiplication over observed events gives the Cox partial likelihoodThe unspecified baseline hazard cancels. This is the usual successive conditional event contribution defining the partial likelihood, not the full event-time likelihood conditioned simultaneously on all event times.
For the four individuals the successive event risk sets are , and . Individual leaves at its right censoring time and contributes no event numerator. ConsequentlyThe last event contributes one and carries no further relative-risk information.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2017 iii Paper 207 5 c Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-05
The ordinary Nelson–Aalen estimator adds at event time . Under a fitted proportional hazards model, replace the number at risk by the sum of fitted hazard multipliers:This is the Breslow estimator of the integrated baseline hazard, using fitted regression coefficients obtained by maximizing the Cox partial likelihood. The denominator arises because the total event intensity is ; with every multiplier equal to one it reduces to the Nelson–Aalen estimator.
The estimator is right-continuous, so already includes the event at . Subtracting it leaves only the events at and , whose risk sets are and . HenceThere is no increment at the censoring time . If the lower endpoint had instead been , an additional would be present. The final singleton event can increase the baseline hazard estimate even though its partial likelihood contribution is one.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2018 iii Paper 207 5 b iii Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-05
Within the risk set , the Cox proportional-hazards model makes the conditional failure probabilities proportional to . ThusThe score function sums observed minus expected covariates at event times. At a finite interior maximum of the Cox partial likelihood,The balance holds in aggregate, not separately at every event. The log partial likelihood is concave becauseWhen there is informative covariate variation in the risk sets, this gives a unique finite solution if it exists. A completely separated event pattern can instead have its maximum only as ; the question's finite implicitly excludes that case.