Additive modelling of functional gradients
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
We consider the problem of estimating functional derivatives and gradients in the framework of a regression setting where one observes functional predictors and scalar responses. Derivatives are then defined as functional directional derivatives that indicate how changes in the predictor function in a specified functional direction are associated with corresponding changes in the scalar response. For a model-free approach, navigating the curse of dimensionality requires the imposition of suitable structural constraints. Accordingly, we develop functional derivative estimation within an additive regression framework. Here, the additive components of functional derivatives correspond to derivatives of nonparametric one-dimensional regression functions with the functional principal components of predictor processes as arguments. This approach requires nothing more than estimating derivatives of one-dimensional nonparametric regressions, and thus is computationally very straightforward to implement, while it also provides substantial flexibility, fast computation and consistent estimation. We illustrate the consistent estimation and interpretation of the resulting functional derivatives and functional gradient fields in a study of the dependence of lifetime fertility of flies on early life reproductive trajectories.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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