Bayesian Extended Redundancy Analysis: A Bayesian Approach to Component-based Regression with Dimension Reduction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Extended redundancy analysis (ERA) combines linear regression with dimension reduction to explore the directional relationships between multiple sets of predictors and outcome variables in a parsimonious manner. It aims to extract a component from each set of predictors in such a way that it accounts for the maximum variance of outcome variables. In this article, we extend ERA into the Bayesian framework, called Bayesian ERA (BERA). The advantages of BERA are threefold. First, BERA enables to make statistical inferences based on samples drawn from the joint posterior distribution of parameters obtained from a Markov chain Monte Carlo algorithm. As such, it does not necessitate any resampling method, which is on the other hand required for (frequentist's) ordinary ERA to test the statistical significance of parameter estimates. Second, it formally incorporates relevant information obtained from previous research into analyses by specifying informative power prior distributions. Third, BERA handles missing data by implementing multiple imputation using a Markov Chain Monte Carlo algorithm, avoiding the potential bias of parameter estimates due to missing data. We assess the performance of BERA through simulation studies and apply BERA to real data regarding academic achievement.
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 | 0.014 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".