Optimal Estimation under a Semiparametric Density Ratio Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In many statistical and econometric applications, we gather individual samples from various interconnected populations that undeniably exhibit common latent structures. Utilizing a model that incorporates these latent structures for such data enhances the efficiency of inferences. Recently, many researchers have been adopting the semiparametric density ratio model (DRM) to address the presence of latent structures. The DRM enables estimation of each population distribution using pooled data, resulting in statistically more efficient estimations in contrast to nonparametric methods that analyze each sample in isolation. In this article, we investigate the limit of the efficiency improvement attainable through the DRM. We focus on situations where one population's sample size significantly exceeds those of the other populations. In such scenarios, we demonstrate that the DRM-based inferences for populations with smaller sample sizes achieve the highest attainable asymptotic efficiency as if a parametric model is assumed. The estimands we consider include the model parameters, distribution functions, and quantiles. We use simulation experiments to support the theoretical findings with a specific focus on quantile estimation. Additionally, we provide an analysis of real revenue data from U.S. collegiate sports to illustrate the efficacy of our contribution.
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 | 0.017 | 0.070 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".