MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995679385 · doi:10.1093/biomet/ast004

Continuously additive models for nonlinear functional regression

2013· article· en· W1995679385 on OpenAlexaff
Hans‐Georg Müller, Yichao Wu, Fang Yao

Bibliographic record

VenueBiometrika · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersDivision of Mathematical SciencesNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMathematicsScalar (mathematics)Additive modelNonlinear systemTensor productNonlinear regressionGeneralized additive modelApplied mathematicsRegressionRegression analysisFunctional data analysisClass (philosophy)StatisticsArtificial intelligenceComputer sciencePure mathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce continuously additive models, which can be viewed as extensions of additive regression models with vector predictors to the case of infinite-dimensional predictors. This approach produces a class of flexible functional nonlinear regression models, where random predictor curves are coupled with scalar responses. In continuously additive modelling, integrals taken over a smooth surface along graphs of predictor functions relate the predictors to the responses in a nonlinear fashion. We use tensor product basis expansions to fit the smooth regression surface that characterizes the model. In a theoretical investigation, we show that the predictions obtained from fitting continuously additive models are consistent and asymptotically normal. We also consider extensions to generalized responses. The proposed class of models outperforms existing functional regression models in simulations and real-data examples.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.153
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations68
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiometrikaSame topicStatistical Methods and InferenceFrench-language works237,207