Robust Regression with Asymmetric Heavy-Tail Noise Distributions
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 the presence of a heavy-tail noise distribution, regression becomes much more difficult. Traditional robust regression methods assume that the noise distribution is symmetric, and they downweight the influence of so-called outliers. When the noise distribution is asymmetric, these methods yield biased regression estimators. Motivated by data-mining problems for the insurance industry, we propose a new approach to robust regression tailored to deal with asymmetric noise distribution. The main idea is to learn most of the parameters of the model using conditional quantile estimators (which are biased but robust estimators of the regression) and to learn a few remaining parameters to combine and correct these estimators, to minimize the average squared error in an unbiased way. Theoretical analysis and experiments show the clear advantages of the approach. Results are on artificial data as well as insurance data, using both linear and neural network predictors.
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