Optimal discriminant analysis in high-dimensional latent factor models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In high-dimensional classification problems, a commonly used approach is to first project the high-dimensional features into a lower-dimensional space, and base the classification on the resulting lower-dimensional projections. In this paper, we formulate a latent-variable model with a hidden low-dimensional structure to justify this two-step procedure and to guide which projection to choose. We propose a computationally efficient classifier that takes certain principal components (PCs) of the observed features as projections, with the number of retained PCs selected in a data-driven way. A general theory is established for analyzing such two-step classifiers based on any projections. We derive explicit rates of convergence of the excess risk of the proposed PC-based classifier. The obtained rates are further shown to be optimal up to logarithmic factors in the minimax sense. Our theory allows the lower dimension to grow with the sample size and is also valid even when the feature dimension (greatly) exceeds the sample size. Extensive simulations corroborate our theoretical findings. The proposed method also performs favorably relative to other existing discriminant methods on three real data examples.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".