Parallelism, uniqueness, and large‐sample asymptotics for the Dantzig selector
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
-regularization method for variable selection and estimation in linear regression. We present a very weak geometric condition on the observed predictors which is related to parallelism and, when satisfied, ensures the uniqueness of Dantzig selector estimators. The condition holds with probability 1, if the predictors are drawn from a continuous distribution. We discuss the necessity of this condition for uniqueness and also provide a closely related condition which ensures uniqueness of lasso estimators (Tibshirani, 1996). Large sample asymptotics for the Dantzig selector, i.e. almost sure convergence and the asymptotic distribution, follow directly from our uniqueness results and a continuity argument. The limiting distribution of the Dantzig selector is generally non-normal. Though our asymptotic results require that the number of predictors is fixed (similar to (Knight and Fu, 2000)), our uniqueness results are valid for an arbitrary number of predictors and observations.
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 | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| 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