On variable ordination of Cholesky‐based estimation for a sparse covariance matrix
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Estimation of a large sparse covariance matrix is of great importance for statistical analysis, especially in high‐dimensional settings. The traditional approach such as the sample covariance matrix performs poorly due to the high dimensionality. The modified Cholesky decomposition (MCD) is a commonly used method for sparse covariance matrix estimation. However, the MCD method relies on the order of variables, which often is not available or cannot be pre‐determined in practice. In this work, we solve this order issue by obtaining a set of covariance matrix estimates based on assuming different orders of variables used in the MCD. Then we consider an ensemble estimator as the “centre” of such a set of covariance matrix estimates with respect to the Frobenius norm. Our proposed method not only ensures that the estimator is positive definite, but also captures the underlying sparse structure of the covariance matrix. Under some regularity conditions, we establish both algorithmic and asymptotic convergence of the proposed method. Its merits are illustrated via simulation studies and a practical example using data from a prostate cancer study.
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 | 0.006 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".