Depth‐weighted robust multivariate regression with application to sparse data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A robust method for multivariate regression is developed based on robust estimators of the joint location and scatter matrix of the explanatory and response variables using the notion of data depth. The multivariate regression estimator possesses desirable affine equivariance properties, achieves the best breakdown point of any affine equivariant estimator, and has an influence function which is bounded in both the response as well as the predictor variable. To increase the efficiency of this estimator, a re‐weighted estimator based on robust Mahalanobis distances of the residual vectors is proposed. In practice, the method is more stable than existing methods that are constructed using subsamples of the data. The resulting multivariate regression technique is computationally feasible, and turns out to perform better than several popular robust multivariate regression methods when applied to various simulated data as well as a real benchmark data set. When the data dimension is quite high compared to the sample size it is still possible to use meaningful notions of data depth along with the corresponding depth values to construct a robust estimator in a sparse setting. The Canadian Journal of Statistics 45: 164–184; 2017 © 2017 Statistical Society of 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.
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 | 0.007 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".