MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2734935854 · doi:10.1111/insr.12351

Shrinkage Estimation Strategies in Generalised Ridge Regression Models: Low/High‐Dimension Regime

2020· article· en· W2734935854 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Statistical Review · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsBrock UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMulticollinearityEstimatorShrinkageDimension (graph theory)Regularization (linguistics)RegressionMathematicsRidgeShrinkage estimatorStatisticsRegression analysisEstimationLasso (programming language)Computer scienceEconometricsArtificial intelligenceEngineeringGeologyBias of an estimatorMinimum-variance unbiased estimator

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary In this study, we suggest pretest and shrinkage methods based on the generalised ridge regression estimation that is suitable for both multicollinear and high‐dimensional problems. We review and develop theoretical results for some of the shrinkage estimators. The relative performance of the shrinkage estimators to some penalty methods is compared and assessed by both simulation and real‐data analysis. We show that the suggested methods can be accounted as good competitors to regularisation techniques, by means of a mean squared error of estimation and prediction error. A thorough comparison of pretest and shrinkage estimators based on the maximum likelihood method to the penalty methods. In this paper, we extend the comparison outlined in his work using the least squares method for the generalised ridge regression.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.233
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.139
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.287 · 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