Robust Linear Model Selection Based on Least Angle Regression
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
In this article we consider the problem of building a linear prediction model when the number of candidate predictors is large and the data possibly contain anomalies that are difficult to visualize and clean. We want to predict the nonoutlying cases; therefore, we need a method that is simultaneously robust and scalable. We consider the stepwise least angle regression (LARS) algorithm which is computationally very efficient but sensitive to outliers. We introduce two different approaches to robustify LARS. The plug-in approach replaces the classical correlations in LARS by robust correlation estimates. The cleaning approach first transforms the data set by shrinking the outliers toward the bulk of the data (which we call multivariate Winsorization) and then applies LARS to the transformed data. We show that the plug-in approach is time-efficient and scalable and that the bootstrap can be used to stabilize its results. We recommend using bootstrapped robustified LARS to sequence a number of candidate predictors to form a reduced set from which a more refined model can be selected.
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 | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| 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