MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2318404316 · doi:10.14288/1.0094775

Multicollinearity, autocorrelation, and ridge regression

2010· article· en· W2318404316 on OpenAlexaff
Jackie Jen-Chy Hsu

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Statistical Methods and Models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMulticollinearityRidgeRegressionStatisticsGeologyAutocorrelationRegression analysisMathematicsPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The presence of multicollinearity can induce large variances in the ordinary Least-squares estimates of repression coefficients. It has been shown that ridge regression can reduce this adverse effect on estimation. The presence of serially correlated error terms can also cause serious estimation problems. Various two-stage methods, have been proposed to obtain good estimates of the regression coefficients in this case. Although the multicollinearity and autocorrelation problems have long been recognized in regression analysis, they are usually dealt with separately. This thesis explores the joint effects of these two conditions on the mean square error properties of the ordinary ridge estimator as well as the ordinary least-squares estimator. We show that ridge regression is doubly advantageous when multicollinearity is accompanied by autocorrelation in both,the errors and the principal components. We then derive a new ridge type estimator that is adjusted for autocorrelation. Finally, using simulation experiments with different degrees of multicollinearity and autocorrelation, we compare the mean square error properties of various estimators.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.068
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.068
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.258 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)Same topicAdvanced Statistical Methods and ModelsFrench-language works237,207