Generalized Functional Extended Redundancy Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Functional extended redundancy analysis (FERA) was recently developed to integrate data reduction into functional linear models. This technique extracts a component from each of multiple sets of predictor data in such a way that the component accounts for the maximum variance of response data. Moreover, it permits predictor and/or response data to be functional. FERA can be of use in describing overall characteristics of each set of predictor data and in summarizing the relationships between predictor and response data. In this paper, we extend FERA into the framework of generalized linear models (GLM), so that it can deal with response data generated from a variety of distributions. Specifically, the proposed method reduces each set of predictor functions to a component and uses the component for explaining exponential-family responses. As in GLM, we specify the random, systematic, and link function parts of the proposed method. We develop an iterative algorithm to maximize a penalized log-likelihood criterion that is derived in combination with a basis function expansion approach. We conduct two simulation studies to investigate the performance of the proposed method based on synthetic data. In addition, we apply the proposed method to two examples to demonstrate its empirical usefulness.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".