Learning Gaussian Graphical Models with Ordered Weighted L1 Regularization
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
We address the task of identifying densely connected subsets of multivariate Gaussian random variables within a graphical model framework. We propose two novel estimators based on the Ordered Weighted $\ell_1$ (OWL) norm: 1) The Graphical OWL (GOWL) is a penalized likelihood method that applies the OWL norm to the lower triangle components of the precision matrix. 2) The column-by-column Graphical OWL (ccGOWL) estimates the precision matrix by performing OWL regularized linear regressions. Both methods can simultaneously identify highly correlated groups of variables and control the sparsity in the resulting precision matrix. We formulate GOWL such that it solves a composite optimization problem and establish that the estimator has a unique global solution. In addition, we prove sufficient grouping conditions for each column of the ccGOWL precision matrix estimate. We propose proximal descent algorithms to find the optimum for both estimators. For synthetic data where group structure is present, the ccGOWL estimator requires significantly reduced computation and achieves similar or greater accuracy than state-of-the-art estimators. Timing comparisons are presented and demonstrates the superior computational efficiency of the ccGOWL. We illustrate the grouping performance of the ccGOWL method on a cancer gene expression data set and an equities data set.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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