MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1964971922 · doi:10.1002/cjs.11172

Variable selection and estimation for multivariate panel count data via the seamless‐${\it L}_{{\rm 0}}$ penalty

2013· article· en· W1964971922 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Haixiang Zhang, Jianguo Sun, Dehui Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCovariateMultivariate statisticsFocus (optics)StatisticsPanel dataVariable (mathematics)Regression analysisMultivariate analysisData setMathematicsSelection (genetic algorithm)Feature selectionCount dataEstimationComputer scienceVariablesSet (abstract data type)EconometricsArtificial intelligenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper considers regression analysis of multivariate panel count data with the focus on variable selection and estimation of significant covariate effects. For the problem, we adopt the penalized estimating equation approach with a focus on the use of the seamless‐$L_0$ penalty. The proposed approach selects variables and estimates regression coefficients simultaneously and the asymptotic properties of the resulting estimates are established. The procedure can be easily carried out with the Newton–Raphson algorithm and is evaluated by simulation studies. Also it is applied to a motivating data set arising from a skin cancer study. The Canadian Journal of Statistics 41: 368–385; 2013 © 2013 Statistical Society of Canada

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)0.056
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.096

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.056
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.195
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.164 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations18
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of StatisticsSame topicStatistical Methods and InferenceFrench-language works237,207