Regression with right-censored high-dimensional data: An application with different imputation techniques
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
This study aims to introduce four modified linear estimators for the right-censored high-dimensional data. Obviously, data of interest involves two important problems to be solved that are censorship and high dimensionality. This paper can be distinguished from other studies in the literature with that it achieves to handle these two problems simultaneously. The main contribution of the paper is merging weightedridge method with the imputation techniques to obtain more efficient estimators than its alternatives. To solve the censorship problem, four imputation techniques are considered based on machine learning algorithms kNN, sliding-windows, regression and support vector machines. The high-dimensionality problem is handled by the weighted ridge approach which provides estimator with less risk than its alternatives because it detects the covariates with a weak contribution via the post-selection procedure. To show the empirical performance of the introduced estimators, a simulation study is made and comparative results are presented. Results show that kNN and regression imputation basis WR esitmators show satisfying performances on estimation of the high-dimensional right-censored model.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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