MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225410102 · doi:10.1016/j.csda.2022.107507

Thresholding tests based on affine LASSO to achieve non-asymptotic nominal level and high power under sparse and dense alternatives in high dimension

2022· article· en· W4225410102 on OpenAlexaff
Sylvain Sardy, Jairo Diaz-Rodriguez, Caroline Giacobino

Bibliographic record

VenueComputational Statistics & Data Analysis · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung
KeywordsMathematicsEstimatorNonparametric statisticsAffine transformationLasso (programming language)Statistical hypothesis testingStatisticsApplied mathematicsThresholdingArtificial intelligenceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thresholding estimators such as the existing square-root and LAD LASSO, and the new affine and GLM LASSO with new link functions, have the ability to set coefficients to zero. They will yield new pivotal statistics which enjoy high power under sparse or dense alternative hypotheses. Under a general formalism, thresholding tests not only recover existing tests such as Rao score test and Fisher nonparametric sign test, but also unveil new tests, for the global/omnibus hypothesis in high dimension in particular. Although pivotal, the new statistics do not have a known distribution, so the critical value of the test is calculated by straightforward Monte Carlo, which yields exact level and high power as illustrated on simulated 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.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.066
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.066
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputational Statistics & Data AnalysisSame topicStatistical Methods and InferenceFrench-language works237,207