MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3010371357 · doi:10.1080/01621459.2020.1737079

Targeted Inference Involving High-Dimensional Data Using Nuisance Penalized Regression

2020· article· en· W3010371357 on OpenAlexaff
Qiang Sun, Heping Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Statistical Association · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute on Drug AbuseNational Human Genome Research InstituteNational Institute of Mental HealthNational Institutes of HealthNational Science Foundation
KeywordsNuisance parameterEstimatorInferenceStatisticEconometricsStatisticsNuisanceMathematicsComputer scienceCoherence (philosophical gambling strategy)Statistical inferenceRegressionRegression analysisArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Analysis of high dimensional data has received considerable and increasing attention in statistics. In practice, we may not be interested in every variable that is observed. Instead, often some of the variables are of particular interest, and the remaining variables are nuisance. To this end, we propose the nuisance penalized regression which does not penalize the parameters of interest. When the coherence between interest parameters and nuisance parameters is negligible, we show that resulting estimator can be directly used for inference without any correction. When the coherence is not negligible, we propose an iteratively procedure to further refine the estimate of interest parameters, based on which we propose a modified profile likelihood based statistic for hypothesis testing. The utilities of our general results are demonstrated in three specific examples. Numerical studies lend further support to our method.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.116
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.138

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.116
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.166
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Statistical AssociationSame topicStatistical Methods and InferenceFrench-language works237,207