MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1482041358 · doi:10.1111/biom.12020

Regularization in Finite Mixture of Regression Models with Diverging Number of Parameters

2013· article· en· W1482041358 on OpenAlexafffund
Abbas Khalili, Shili Lin

Bibliographic record

VenueBiometrics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Methods and Mixture Models
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsFeature selectionSample size determinationRegularization (linguistics)Parametric statisticsComputer scienceFeature (linguistics)PopulationRegression analysisRegressionVariable (mathematics)MathematicsStatisticsArtificial intelligenceMachine learningMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Feature (variable) selection has become a fundamentally important problem in recent statistical literature. Sometimes, in applications, many variables are introduced to reduce possible modeling biases, but the number of variables a model can accommodate is often limited by the amount of data available. In other words, the number of variables considered depends on the sample size, which reflects the estimability of the parametric model. In this article, we consider the problem of feature selection in finite mixture of regression models when the number of parameters in the model can increase with the sample size. We propose a penalized likelihood approach for feature selection in these models. Under certain regularity conditions, our approach leads to consistent variable selection. We carry out extensive simulation studies to evaluate the performance of the proposed approach under controlled settings. We also applied the proposed method to two real data. The first is on telemonitoring of Parkinson's disease (PD), where the problem concerns whether dysphonic features extracted from the patients' speech signals recorded at home can be used as surrogates to study PD severity and progression. The second is on breast cancer prognosis, in which one is interested in assessing whether cell nuclear features may offer prognostic values on long-term survival of breast cancer patients. Our analysis in each of the application revealed a mixture structure in the study population and uncovered a unique relationship between the features and the response variable in each of the mixture component.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.096

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.238 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations37
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiometricsSame topicBayesian Methods and Mixture ModelsFrench-language works237,207