Bootstrap rank‐ordered conditional mutual information (broCMI): A nonlinear input variable selection method for water resources modeling
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
Abstract The input variable selection problem has recently garnered much interest in the time series modeling community, especially within water resources applications, demonstrating that information theoretic (nonlinear)‐based input variable selection algorithms such as partial mutual information (PMI) selection (PMIS) provide an improved representation of the modeled process when compared to linear alternatives such as partial correlation input selection (PCIS). PMIS is a popular algorithm for water resources modeling problems considering nonlinear input variable selection; however, this method requires the specification of two nonlinear regression models, each with parametric settings that greatly influence the selected input variables. Other attempts to develop input variable selection methods using conditional mutual information (CMI) (an analog to PMI) have been formulated under different parametric pretenses such as k nearest‐neighbor (KNN) statistics or kernel density estimates (KDE). In this paper, we introduce a new input variable selection method based on CMI that uses a nonparametric multivariate continuous probability estimator based on Edgeworth approximations (EA). We improve the EA method by considering the uncertainty in the input variable selection procedure by introducing a bootstrap resampling procedure that uses rank statistics to order the selected input sets; we name our proposed method bootstrap rank‐ordered CMI (broCMI). We demonstrate the superior performance of broCMI when compared to CMI‐based alternatives (EA, KDE, and KNN), PMIS, and PCIS input variable selection algorithms on a set of seven synthetic test problems and a real‐world urban water demand (UWD) forecasting experiment in Ottawa, Canada.
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 | 0.004 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 it