Minimax A‐, c‐, and I‐optimal regression designs for models with heteroscedastic errors
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
It is well known that it is difficult to construct minimax optimal designs. Furthermore, since in practice we never know the true error variance, it is important to allow small deviations and construct robust optimal designs. We investigate a class of minimax optimal regression designs for models with heteroscedastic errors that are robust against possible misspecification of the error variance. Commonly used A‐, c‐, and I‐optimality criteria are included in this class of minimax optimal designs. Several theoretical results are obtained, including a necessary condition and a reflection symmetry for these minimax optimal designs. In this article, we focus mainly on linear models and assume that an approximate error variance function is available. However, we also briefly discuss how the methodology works for nonlinear models. We then propose an effective algorithm to solve challenging nonconvex optimization problems to find minimax designs on discrete design spaces. Examples are given to illustrate minimax optimal designs and their properties.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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