323
Views
0
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Articles

Personalised treatment assignment maximising expected benefit with smooth hinge loss

, &
Pages 37-47 | Received 12 Mar 2017, Accepted 30 Apr 2017, Published online: 23 May 2017

Figures & data

Figure 1. Hinge loss h and smooth hinge loss hk.

Figure 1. Hinge loss h and smooth hinge loss hk.

Figure 2. Comparison of sensitivity (sHinge vs. ROWSi).

Figure 2. Comparison of sensitivity (sHinge vs. ROWSi).

Figure 3. Comparison of specificity (sHinge vs. ROWSi).

Figure 3. Comparison of specificity (sHinge vs. ROWSi).

Figure 4. Comparison of prediction accuracy (sHinge vs. ROWSi).

Figure 4. Comparison of prediction accuracy (sHinge vs. ROWSi).

Table 1. Variables in the mammography screening data set.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.