Linear mode regression with covariate measurement error
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
Abstract We consider estimating the mode of a response given an error‐prone covariate. It is shown that ignoring measurement error typically leads to inconsistent inference for the conditional mode of the response given the true covariate, as well as misleading inference for regression coefficients in the conditional mode model. To account for measurement error, we first employ the Monte Carlo corrected score method (Novick & Stefanski, 2002) to obtain an unbiased score function based on which the regression coefficients can be estimated consistently. To relax the normality assumption on measurement error this method requires, we propose another method where deconvoluting kernels are used to construct an objective function that is maximized to obtain consistent estimators of the regression coefficients. Besides rigorous investigation on asymptotic properties of the new estimators, we study their finite sample performance via extensive simulation experiments, and find that the proposed methods substantially outperform a naive inference method that ignores measurement error. The Canadian Journal of Statistics 47: 262–280; 2019 © 2019 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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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