MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206538304 · doi:10.1002/cjs.11675

Economic variable selection

2021· article· en· W4206538304 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Koji Miyawaki, Steven N. MacEachern

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceKwansei Gakuin University
KeywordsFeature selectionVariable (mathematics)CovariateSelection (genetic algorithm)Computer scienceModel selectionBayes' theoremEconometricsBayesian probabilityRegression analysisRegressionPerspective (graphical)Machine learningArtificial intelligenceMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Regression plays a central role in the discipline of statistics and is the primary analytic technique in many research areas. Variable selection is a classical and major problem for regression. This article emphasizes the economic aspect of variable selection. The problem is formulated in terms of the cost of predictors to be purchased for future use: only the subset of covariates used in the model will need to be purchased. This leads to a decision‐theoretic formulation of the variable selection problems, which includes the cost of predictors as well as their effect. We adopt a Bayesian perspective and propose two approaches to address uncertainty about the model and model parameters. These approaches, termed the restricted and extended approaches, lead us to rethink model averaging. From an objective or robust Bayes point of view, the former is preferred. The proposed method is applied to three popular datasets for illustration.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of StatisticsSame topicStatistical Methods and InferenceFrench-language works237,207