The Sparse MLE for Ultrahigh-Dimensional Feature Screening
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Feature selection is fundamental for modeling the high dimensional data, where the number of features can be huge and much larger than the sample size. Since the feature space is so large, many traditional procedures become numerically infeasible. It is hence essential to first remove most apparently non-influential features before any elaborative analysis. Recently, several procedures have been developed for this purpose, which include the sure-independent-screening (SIS) as a widely-used technique. To gain the computational efficiency, the SIS screens features based on their individual predicting power. In this paper, we propose a new screening method via the sparsity-restricted maximum likelihood estimator (SMLE). The new method naturally takes the joint effects of features in the screening process, which gives itself an edge to potentially outperform the existing methods. This conjecture is further supported by the simulation studies under a number of modeling settings. We show that the proposed method is screening consistent in the context of ultra-high-dimensional generalized linear models.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.042 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it