Sparse envelope model: efficient estimation and response variable selection in multivariate linear regression
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
The envelope model allows efficient estimation in multivariate linear regression. In this paper, we propose the sparse envelope model, which is motivated by applications where some response variables are invariant with respect to changes of the predictors and have zero regression coefficients. The envelope estimator is consistent but not sparse, and in many situations it is important to identify the response variables for which the regression coefficients are zero. The sparse envelope model performs variable selection on the responses and preserves the efficiency gains offered by the envelope model. Response variable selection arises naturally in many applications, but has not been studied as thoroughly as predictor variable selection. In this paper, we discuss response variable selection in both the standard multivariate linear regression and the envelope contexts. In response variable selection, even if a response has zero coefficients, it should still be retained to improve the estimation efficiency of the nonzero coefficients. This is different from the practice in predictor variable selection. We establish consistency and the oracle property and obtain the asymptotic distribution of the sparse envelope estimator.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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