Alphabeta Math
Pipeline-generated
How statement and proof provenance work

The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.

  • Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
  • AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
  • AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.

These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.

✓ 1 result · all verified · 1 also independently AI-judged
Every result on this page is machine-checked by a proof checker and read in full and owner-audited; the judge is an additional, independent cross-model AI review of the proofs; all 1 also cleared it.

Cox PH and partial likelihood — Examples

1 · Prerequisites

2 · Summary

The worked example calculates a no-tie risk-set contribution, distinguishes an instantaneous hazard ratio from a cumulative event-risk ratio, and shows how time-varying covariate contrasts produce time-varying hazard ratios. Tied-event likelihoods require an explicitly stated grouped-time or coarsened-order convention.

3 · Logical flowchart

4 · Definitions, theorems and proofs

None yet.

5 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements

ExampleConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-6-luna)Open item page →

Risk-set likelihood and time-varying hazard-ratio check

Example

At one untied failure time t, suppose the risk set is R(t)={1,2,3}, the failing subject is 2, and the covariate values at that time are Z1(t)=0, Z2(t)=1, and Z3(t)=2. The partial-likelihood contribution is eβ1+eβ+e2β. For a separate survival comparison, take baseline hazard λ0(t)=1 on [0,1], β0=log⁡2, and fixed covariates z=1 and z′=0. Their hazard ratio is 2, while their event-risk ratio by time 1 is 1+e−1. If instead Z1(t)=t and Z2(t)=0, their instantaneous hazard ratio is 2t, so the between-path hazard ratio varies over time even though β is fixed.

Verification

Given: Use the Cox partial likelihood, survival, and hazard-ratio definitions in [F1]–[F3], and the predictability definition in [F4]. Verify the risk-set contribution and the two hazard comparisons.

[F1] Cox proportional-hazards model and partial likelihood: for untied failures, the partial likelihood uses each event subject's exponential weight divided by the sum of exponential weights over its risk set.

[F2] Cox proportional-hazards model and partial likelihood: at times with positive baseline hazard, the fixed-value hazard ratio is eβT(z−z′).

[F3] Cox proportional-hazards model and partial likelihood: for a constant covariate value z, the event survival function is S(t∣z)=exp⁡{−eβ0TzΛ0(t)}.

[F4] Progressively measurable and predictable processes: deterministic Borel functions of time are predictable.

1.1givenF1algebra

Substituting wj(t)=eβZj(t) for the three risk-set members in the no-tie partial-likelihood formula of [F1], subject 2 contributes eβ/(1+eβ+e2β).

1.2givenF2F3algebra

For constant covariate z, the survival formula [F3] with λ0(t)=1 gives P(T≤1∣z)=1−e−eβz. At β0=log⁡2, the risks for z=1 and z′=0 are 1−e−2 and 1−e−1, so their ratio is (1−e−2)/(1−e−1)=1+e−1<2, although their hazard ratio from [F2] is eβ0(z−z′)=2.

2.1givenF2F4algebra∎

By [F4], the deterministic paths Z1(t)=t and Z2(t)=0 are predictable. Substitution into the relative hazard factor of [F2] at β0=log⁡2 gives e(log⁡2)t=2t, which equals 1 at t=0 and 2 at t=1. Thus a fixed regression coefficient does not force the hazard ratio between changing covariate paths to be constant.

Sources