MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2998961846 · doi:10.1214/19-ejs1664

Efficient estimation in expectile regression using envelope models

2020· article· en· W2998961846 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueElectronic Journal of Statistics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsEstimatorGeneralizationStatisticsConditional probability distributionConsistency (knowledge bases)RegressionApplied mathematicsRegression analysisAsymptotic distributionEconometricsMathematical optimization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As a generalization of the classical linear regression, expectile regression (ER) explores the relationship between the conditional expectile of a response variable and a set of predictor variables. ER with respect to different expectile levels can provide a comprehensive picture of the conditional distribution of the response variable given the predictors. We adopt an efficient estimation method called the envelope model ([8]) in ER, and construct a novel envelope expectile regression (EER) model. Estimation of the EER parameters can be performed using the generalized method of moments (GMM). We establish the consistency and derive the asymptotic distribution of the EER estimators. In addition, we show that the EER estimators are asymptotically more efficient than the ER estimators. Numerical experiments and real data examples are provided to demonstrate the efficiency gains attained by EER compared to ER, and the efficiency gains can further lead to improvements in prediction.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.486
Threshold uncertainty score0.431

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.119
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.260 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it