MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379107014 · doi:10.1093/jrsssb/qkad056

Ying Zhou and Xinyi Zhang's contribution to the Discussion of ‘Vintage Factor Analysis with Varimax Performs Statistical Inference’ by Rohe & Zeng

2023· article· en· W4379107014 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B (Statistical Methodology) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTechnology and Data Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVarimax rotationZhàngInferenceVintageStatisticsEconometricsMathematicsHistoryComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceArchaeologyChina

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We congratulate Rohe and Zeng for their inspiring work on providing theoretical support for Varimax rotation in factor analysis. A key contribution of the article is the demonstration that if the factors in the semi-parametric factor model follow heavy-tailed distribution, then performing principal components analysis (PCA) on the observed data matrix along with Varimax rotation applied to the principal components does produce interpretable explanatory variables. We have the following comments and questions: The article mainly discussed the semi-parametric model, which seems to exclude the classical factor model in the form AT=LF+ε⁠, where observation matrix A∈Rn×d⁠, loading matrix L∈Rd×k⁠, factor matrix F∈Rk×n⁠, error term matrix ε∈Rd×n⁠. One question is whether there is a similar result applicable to the classical factor model. If not, what are the obstacles? And what properties of semi-parametric factor model facilitate the identification? The main theorem in the article concerns the factor matrix F (A in their notation), while in many applications, people are interested in the loading matrix L. It appears there is no loading matrix in semi-parametric factor model. Perhaps BYT in Definition 1 is somewhat related to loading matrix. This lead to the question that, if there is a parallel result for Y. As one of the modern factor models, the Independent Components Analysis is an unsupervised learning algorithm and can be applied for feature extraction. Would it be possible to integrate class information with the Varimax rotation for extracting features that belong to well-separated classes? It would be interesting to see if the Vintage Factor Analysis can be used in a supervised fashion. If we understand it correctly, derivation of the population results for PCA with latent variable models and Varimax uses Σ^Z−1/2 to show how U can be recovered from Z. In theory, dimension d can be of the same order as n. However, in this case, the sample covariance matrix Σ^Z may not be invertible and an alternative estimation of ΣZ−1/2 is needed. Can similar results be established? The factors Z are allowed to be correlated, will the corresponding theory be a direct generalisation from the independent setting? The authors replied later, in writing, as follows.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
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 score0.652
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.289 · 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