Variable selection in nonparametric functional concurrent regression
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
We develop a new method for variable selection in nonparametric functional concurrent regression. The commonly used functional linear concurrent model (FLCM) is far too restrictive in assuming linearity of the covariate effects, which is not necessarily true in many real‐world applications. The nonparametric functional concurrent model (NPFCM), on the other hand, is much more flexible and can capture complex dynamic relationships present between the response and the covariates. We extend the classically used variable selection methods, e.g., group LASSO, group SCAD and group MCP, to perform variable selection in NPFCM. We show via numerical simulations that the proposed variable selection method with the non‐convex penalties can identify the true functional predictors with minimal false‐positive rate and negligible false‐negative rate. The proposed method also provides better out‐of‐sample prediction accuracy compared to the FLCM in the presence of nonlinear effects of the functional predictors. The proposed method's application is demonstrated by identifying the influential predictor variables in two real data studies: a dietary calcium absorption study, and some bike‐sharing data.
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 | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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