Composite Likelihood Bayesian Information Criteria for Model Selection in High-Dimensional Data
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
For high-dimensional data sets with complicated dependency structures, the full likelihood approach often leads to intractable computational complexity. This imposes difficulty on model selection, given that most traditionally used information criteria require evaluation of the full likelihood. We propose a composite likelihood version of the Bayes information criterion (BIC) and establish its consistency property for the selection of the true underlying marginal model. Our proposed BIC is shown to be selection-consistent under some mild regularity conditions, where the number of potential model parameters is allowed to increase to infinity at a certain rate of the sample size. Simulation studies demonstrate the empirical performance of this new BIC, especially for the scenario where the number of parameters increases with sample size. Technical proofs of our theoretical results are provided in the online supplemental materials.
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 | 0.013 |
| 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