The EAS approach for graphical selection consistency in vector autoregression models
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 As evidenced by various recent and significant papers within the frequentist literature, along with numerous applications in macroeconomics, genomics, and neuroscience, there continues to be substantial interest in understanding the theoretical estimation properties of high‐dimensional vector autoregression (VAR) models. To date, however, while Bayesian VAR (BVAR) models have been developed and studied empirically (primarily in the econometrics literature), there exist very few theoretical investigations of the repeated‐sampling properties for BVAR models in the literature, and there exist no generalized fiducial investigations of VAR models. In this direction, we construct methodology via the ‐ admissible subsets (EAS) approach for inference based on a generalized fiducial distribution of relative model probabilities over all sets of active/inactive components (graphs) of the VAR transition matrix. We provide a mathematical proof of pairwise and strong graphical selection consistency for the EAS approach for stable VAR(1) models, and demonstrate empirically that it is an effective strategy in high‐dimensional settings.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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