Integer-Valued, Minimax Robust Designs for Estimation and Extrapolation in Heteroscedastic, Approximately Linear Models
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
Abstract We present our findings on a new approach to robust regression design. This approach differs from previous investigations into this area in three respects: The use of a finite design space, the use of simulated annealing to carry out the numerical minimization problems, and in our search for integer-valued, rather than continuous, designs. We present designs for the situation in which the response is thought to be approximately polynomial. We also discuss the cases of approximate first- and second-order multiple regression. In each case we allow for possible heteroscedasticity and also obtain minimax regression weights. The results are extended to cover extrapolation of the regression response to regions outside of the design space. A case study involving dose-response experimentation is undertaken. The optimal robust designs, which protect against bias as well as variance, can be roughly described as being obtained from the classical variance-minimizing designs by replacing replicates with clusters of observations at nearby but distinct sites.
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 | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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