MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220991108 · doi:10.1214/22-ejs1998

Adaptive threshold-based classification of sparse high-dimensional data

2022· article· en· W4220991108 on OpenAlexafffund
Tatjana Pavlenko, Natalia A. Stepanova, L.F. Thompson

Bibliographic record

VenueElectronic Journal of Statistics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicRandom Matrices and Applications
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMathematicsClassifier (UML)Pattern recognition (psychology)Sample size determinationBinary classificationFeature (linguistics)Binary numberDiagonalCovariance matrixLinear classifierAlgorithmCovarianceArtificial intelligenceStatisticsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We revisit the problem of designing an efficient binary classifier in a challenging high-dimensional framework. The model under study assumes some local dependence structure among feature variables represented by a block-diagonal covariance matrix with a growing number of blocks of an arbitrary, but fixed size. The blocks correspond to non-overlapping independent groups of strongly correlated features. To assess the relevance of a particular block in predicting the response, we introduce a measure of “signal strength” pertaining to each feature block. This measure is then used to specify a sparse model of our interest. We further propose a threshold-based feature selector which operates as a screen-and-clean scheme integrated into a linear classifier: the data is subject to screening and hard threshold cleaning to filter out the blocks that contain no signals. Asymptotic properties of the proposed classifiers are studied when the sample size n depends on the number of feature blocks b, and the sample size goes to infinity with b at a slower rate than b. The new classifiers, which are fully adaptive to unknown parameters of the model, are shown to perform asymptotically optimally in a large part of the classification region. The numerical study confirms good analytical properties of the new classifiers that compare favorably to the existing threshold-based procedure used in a similar context.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.077
GPT teacher head0.323
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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElectronic Journal of StatisticsSame topicRandom Matrices and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207