Lossless Transformations and Excess Risk Bounds in Statistical Inference
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We study the excess minimum risk in statistical inference, defined as the difference between the minimum expected loss when estimating a random variable from an observed feature vector and the minimum expected loss when estimating the same random variable from a transformation (statistic) of the feature vector. After characterizing lossless transformations, i.e., transformations for which the excess risk is zero for all loss functions, we construct a partitioning test statistic for the hypothesis that a given transformation is lossless, and we show that for i.i.d. data the test is strongly consistent. More generally, we develop information-theoretic upper bounds on the excess risk that uniformly hold over fairly general classes of loss functions. Based on these bounds, we introduce the notion of a δ-lossless transformation and give sufficient conditions for a given transformation to be universally δ-lossless. Applications to classification, nonparametric regression, portfolio strategies, information bottlenecks, and deep learning are also surveyed.
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 | 0.020 | 0.107 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| 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".