Robust kernel estimator for densities of unknown smoothness
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
Results on non-parametric kernel estimators of density differ according to the assumed degree of density smoothness. A kernel/bandwidth pair that was optimal for a twice differentiable function may not be suitable when the density is piecewise linear. If there is uncertainty about the degree of smoothness, an inappropriate choice may lead to under- or oversmoothing. To examine various possible outcomes we provide asymptotic results on kernel estimation of a continuous density for an arbitrary bandwidth/kernel pair and derive the limit joint distribution of kernel density estimators corresponding to different bandwidths and kernel functions. Using these results, we propose a combined estimator constructed as an optimal linear combination of several estimators with different bandwidth/kernel pairs. Its theoretical properties [Kotlyarova, Y. and Zinde-Walsh, V., 2006, Non- and semi-parametric estimation in models with unknown smoothness. Economics Letters, 93, 379–386] are such that it automatically attains the best possible rate without a priori knowledge of the degree of smoothness. Our Monte-Carlo results confirm the advantages of the combined estimator of density.
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 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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