MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Principal Component Analysis for Big Data

2018· other· en· W3166788073 on OpenAlexaff
Jianqing Fan, Qiang Sun, Wen‐Xin Zhou, Ziwei Zhu

Bibliographic record

VenueWiley StatsRef: Statistics Reference Online · 2018
Typeother
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrincipal component analysisBig dataDimensionality reductionComputer scienceKernel principal component analysisSubspace topologyData scienceCausal inferenceSparse PCAInferenceFactor analysisData miningFocus (optics)Artificial intelligenceDimension (graph theory)AnalyticsData analysisStatistical inferenceRanking (information retrieval)Machine learningKernel methodMathematicsEconometricsStatisticsSupport vector machine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Big data is transforming our world, revolutionizing operations and analytics everywhere, from financial engineering to biomedical sciences. The complexity of big data often makes dimension reduction techniques necessary before conducting statistical inference. Principal component analysis, commonly referred to as PCA, has become an essential tool for multivariate data analysis and unsupervised dimension reduction, the goal of which is to find a lower dimensional subspace that captures most of the variation in the dataset. This article provides an overview of methodological and theoretical developments of PCA over the past decade, with focus on its applications to big data analytics. We first review the mathematical formulation of PCA and its theoretical development from the view point of perturbation analysis. We then briefly discuss the relationship between PCA and factor analysis as well as its applications to large covariance estimation and multiple testing. PCA also finds important applications in many modern machine learning problems, and in this article, we focus on community detection, ranking, mixture model, and manifold learning.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.007

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 head0.377
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.078 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations53
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWiley StatsRef: Statistics Reference OnlineSame topicStatistical Methods and InferenceFrench-language works237,207