Use , a nonincreasing right-continuous survivor function. The empirical likelihood treats an exact event as a probability mass rather than maximizing an unrestricted probability density function at isolated data points. Under a noninformative observation mechanism, the event-time likelihood contributions are
The second, third and fourth rows account for right censoring, left censoring and interval censoring, respectively. A censoring mechanism with unknown dependence on cannot simply be dropped; these are the event-time factors under independent censoring or another ignorable mechanism.
There is a useful finite-dimensional reduction before optimization. Let be the set in which observation tells us its event time lies. Partition the time axis using all observed endpoints, keeping endpoint singletons when required. Within each cell, membership in every is constant. Assign cell masses , with , including a tail cell when necessary, and let be the cell-membership indicator. Then
Mass locations within a cell are not identifiable and need not be separate parameters. Repeated observation sets can be grouped and their factors raised to their counts. Cells with the same membership column can also be combined. If one column is componentwise dominated by another, transferring its mass to the dominating column weakly increases every factor; hence an unconstrained maximizing distribution can omit the dominated cell. This proves likelihood support reduction under censoring directly. The remaining log-likelihood is a concave function of the probability masses on a simplex, often far smaller than the original unrestricted distribution problem. Added constraints can restrict which transfers remain permissible.
For right censoring alone, take a grid of all distinct observation times and initially allow a discrete hazard
Let be the number of events at and the risk set immediately before that time. For tied recorded times, use the convention that events precede censoring, so those censored at remain in this risk set. The mass at is , and the probability of surviving past is . Substitution into the exact-event and right-censoring factors yields
The exponent counts all observed individuals whose information requires survival beyond that jump. In particular, censoring observations affect the risk set even though they give no event factor.
Each factor can now be maximized separately. For , its derivative is , giving ; the second derivative is negative. The same result holds at the boundaries: if , and if . The Kaplan–Meier estimator is therefore
Only event times contribute nontrivial factors. Residual mass after the last observation may be placed anywhere later without changing the empirical likelihood. A terminal plateau is therefore not evidence of permanent survival; the tail is unobserved.
For a constrained Kaplan–Meier estimator with , first split the support cells at . In the probability-mass representation the exact optimization problem is
The last sum excludes a singleton mass at , because . This is a concave maximization with linear equality constraints, so it directly gives a constrained nonparametric maximum-likelihood estimator. It also handles a time lying between observed events or beyond all follow-up.
An equivalent hazard formulation adds to the grid, permits zero-event jumps when needed, and imposes
For an interior solution using only positive-event jumps before , add to the log-likelihood. Differentiating gives
The multiplier is found by solving the scalar equation
with denominators and fitted hazards in their admissible ranges. On an admissible event-only interior branch, this product is increasing in , making a one-dimensional root search straightforward.
A constraint can require mass at a time with no observed event. The event-only multiplier equation must not be used blindly. To include boundary cases, put . Before , the constraint becomes , and each contribution is
For its multiplier equation again gives . For , its derivative is , so the maximum has when , and may have when . Such a jump supplies mass needed by the constraint; an unobserved tail with is included by the same rule. For example, if every observation is right-censored after and there are no events, the ordinary estimate has . To impose , put mass at and the remaining after all censoring times. The maximized likelihood is , although there are no event-time factors at all. The mass-constrained optimization above automatically accounts for this possibility and for any remaining tail nonuniqueness.

Pinned article: Introduction to the OurBigBook Project

Welcome to the OurBigBook Project! Our goal is to create the perfect publishing platform for STEM subjects, and get university-level students to write the best free STEM tutorials ever.
Everyone is welcome to create an account and play with the site: ourbigbook.com/go/register. We belive that students themselves can write amazing tutorials, but teachers are welcome too. You can write about anything you want, it doesn't have to be STEM or even educational. Silly test content is very welcome and you won't be penalized in any way. Just keep it legal!
We have two killer features:
  1. topics: topics group articles by different users with the same title, e.g. here is the topic for the "Fundamental Theorem of Calculus" ourbigbook.com/go/topic/fundamental-theorem-of-calculus
    Articles of different users are sorted by upvote within each article page. This feature is a bit like:
    • a Wikipedia where each user can have their own version of each article
    • a Q&A website like Stack Overflow, where multiple people can give their views on a given topic, and the best ones are sorted by upvote. Except you don't need to wait for someone to ask first, and any topic goes, no matter how narrow or broad
    This feature makes it possible for readers to find better explanations of any topic created by other writers. And it allows writers to create an explanation in a place that readers might actually find it.
    Figure 1.
    Screenshot of the "Derivative" topic page
    . View it live at: ourbigbook.com/go/topic/derivative
  2. local editing: you can store all your personal knowledge base content locally in a plaintext markup format that can be edited locally and published either:
    This way you can be sure that even if OurBigBook.com were to go down one day (which we have no plans to do as it is quite cheap to host!), your content will still be perfectly readable as a static site.
    Figure 5. . You can also edit articles on the Web editor without installing anything locally.
    Video 3.
    Edit locally and publish demo
    . Source. This shows editing OurBigBook Markup and publishing it using the Visual Studio Code extension.
  3. https://raw.githubusercontent.com/ourbigbook/ourbigbook-media/master/feature/x/hilbert-space-arrow.png
  4. Infinitely deep tables of contents:
    Figure 6.
    Dynamic article tree with infinitely deep table of contents
    .
    Descendant pages can also show up as toplevel e.g.: ourbigbook.com/cirosantilli/chordate-subclade
All our software is open source and hosted at: github.com/ourbigbook/ourbigbook
Further documentation can be found at: docs.ourbigbook.com
Feel free to reach our to us for any help or suggestions: docs.ourbigbook.com/#contact