A new GEE method to account for heteroscedasticity using asymmetric least-square regressions
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
Generalized estimating equations (GEE) are widely used to analyze longitudinal data; however, they are not appropriate for heteroscedastic data, because they only estimate regressor effects on the mean response – and therefore do not account for data heterogeneity. Here, we combine the GEE with the asymmetric least squares (expectile) regression to derive a new class of estimators, which we call generalized expectile estimating equations (GEEE). The GEEE model estimates regressor effects on the expectiles of the response distribution, which provides a detailed view of regressor effects on the entire response distribution. In addition to capturing data heteroscedasticity, the GEEE extends the various working correlation structures to account for within-subject dependence. We derive the asymptotic properties of the GEEE estimators and propose a robust estimator of its covariance matrix for inference (see our R package, github.com/AmBarry/expectgee). Our simulations show that the GEEE estimator is non-biased and efficient, and our real data analysis shows it captures heteroscedasticity.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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