Doubly robust weighted composite quantile regression based on SCAD‐<i>L</i><sub>2</sub>
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
In this article, a robust variable selection procedure based on the weighted composite quantile regression (WCQR) is proposed. Compared with the composite quantile regression (CQR), WCQR is robust to heavy‐tailed errors and outliers in the explanatory variables. For the choice of the weights in the WCQR, we employ a weighting scheme based on the principal component method. To select variables with grouping effect, we consider WCQR with SCAD‐ L 2 penalization. Furthermore, under some suitable assumptions, the theoretical properties, including the consistency and oracle property of the estimator, are established with a diverging number of parameters. In addition, we study the numerical performance of the proposed method in the case of ultrahigh‐dimensional data. Simulation studies and real examples are provided to demonstrate the superiority of our method over the CQR method when there are outliers in the explanatory variables and/or the random error is from a heavy‐tailed distribution.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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