The name is absent

ix

4.1 Comparison of the estimated success rates under the four models under
SO. The horizontal axis shows the n = 12 success rates under the
simulation truth S^,_o. The upper panel shows the absolute bias. The
lower panel shows mean squared error. Both are arranged by true 77.
The five lines and labels correspond to the models NEPPM with 7 — 1
[1], NEPPM with 7 — 1/2 [2], parametric Hierarchical [3], HLRM [4]
and separate [5] models.......................... 93

4.2 Scenario SO. Coverage probabilities of the central 95% credible inter-
vals under the NEPPM with 7 = 1 vs. the HLRM. From left to right,
the first three success rates correspond to poor prognosis (x_i = —1),
the following six to intermediate (x_i = 0) and the last three to good
prognosis (x_i = 1). The character sizes are proportional to the sample
size Ni.................................... 94

4.3 Scenarios Sl through S4. Panels (a) through (d) summarize simulation
under scenarios Sl through S4. Comparison of the estimated success
rates under the NEPPM (star “*”) vs. the HLRM (circle “o”). The
horizontal axis shows the n = 12 true success rates under the assumed
scenario. The upper, medium and lower panels show absolute value of
the bias, mean square error and coverage probability of the central 95%
credible interval, respectively. All are arranged by subtype. Under Sl
(panel (a)), from left to right, the first three success rates correspond
to poor prognosis (τ_i = -1), the following six to intermediate (x_i = 0)
and the last three to good prognosis (a√ = 1). The point sizes are
proportional to the sample size N_i.................... 96

<<   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   >>

More intriguing information