MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971333466 · doi:10.1080/10485250601046752

Risk comparison of some shrinkage M-estimators in linear models

2006· article· en· W1971333466 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of nonparametric statistics · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicAdvanced Statistical Process Monitoring
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEstimatorMathematicsA priori and a posterioriApplied mathematicsLinear regressionLinear modelSubspace topologyAsymptotic distributionStatisticsAsymptotic analysisSampling (signal processing)Computer scienceMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The problem of robust estimation of a (linear) regression parameter (vector), in the presence of nuisance scale parameter, is considered when it is a priori suspected that the regression could be restricted to a linear subspace. Asymptotic properties of variants of Stein-rule M-estimators (including the positive-rule shrinkage M-estimators) are studied. Under an asymptotic distributional quadratic risk criterion, their relative dominance picture is explored, analytically as well as by simulation. An extensive sampling experiment is used to examine the small sample characteristics of the proposed estimators over a wide-range of data sampling designs and distributions. Our simulation experiments have provided strong evidence that corroborates with the asymptotic theory. Two examples are provided to illustrate the performance of the estimators in real-life situations.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.523
Threshold uncertainty score0.982

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.339 · 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