MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308440598 · doi:10.1002/cjs.11732

Pretest and shrinkage estimators in generalized partially linear models with application to real data

2022· article· en· W4308440598 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Shakhawat Hossain, Saumen Mandal, Le An

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Statistics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of Winnipeg
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Manitoba
KeywordsEstimatorCovariateParametric statisticsLinear modelDimension (graph theory)Nonparametric statisticsLinear regressionMathematicsInferenceModel selectionMonte Carlo methodStatistical inferenceComputer scienceStatisticsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Semiparametric models hold promise to address many challenges to statistical inference that arise from real‐world applications, but their novelty and theoretical complexity create challenges for estimation. Taking advantage of the broad applicability of semiparametric models, we propose some novel and improved methods to estimate the regression coefficients of generalized partially linear models (GPLM). This model extends the generalized linear model by adding a nonparametric component. Like in parametric models, variable selection is important in the GPLM to single out the inactive covariates for the response. Instead of deleting inactive covariates, our approach uses them as auxiliary information in the estimation procedure. We then define two models, one that includes all the covariates and another that includes the active covariates only. We then combine these two model estimators optimally to form the pretest and shrinkage estimators. Asymptotic properties are studied to derive the asymptotic biases and risks of the proposed estimators. We show that if the shrinkage dimension exceeds two, the asymptotic risks of the shrinkage estimators are strictly less than those of the full model estimators. Extensive Monte Carlo simulation studies are conducted to examine the finite‐sample performance of the proposed estimation methods. We then apply our proposed methods to two real data sets. Our simulation and real data results show that the proposed estimators perform with higher accuracy and lower variability in the estimation of regression parameters for GPLM compared with competing estimation methods.

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.079
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.114

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.079
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.140
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.203 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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