CVXSADes: a stochastic algorithm for constructing optimal exact regression designs with single or multiple objectives
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We propose an algorithm to construct optimal exact designs (EDs). Most of the work in the optimal regression design literature focuses on the approximate design (AD) paradigm due to its desired properties, including the optimality verification conditions derived by Kiefer (1959, 1974). ADs may have unbalanced weights, and practitioners may have difficulty implementing them with a designated run size $n$. Some EDs are constructed using rounding methods to get an integer number of runs at each support point of an AD, but this approach may not yield optimal results. To construct EDs, one may need to perform new combinatorial constructions for each $n$, and there is no unified approach to construct them. Therefore, we develop a systematic way to construct EDs for any given $n$. Our method can transform ADs into EDs while retaining high statistical efficiency in two steps. The first step involves constructing an AD by utilizing the convex nature of many design criteria. The second step employs a simulated annealing algorithm to search for the ED stochastically. Through several applications, we demonstrate the utility of our method for various design problems. Additionally, we show that the design efficiency approaches unity as the number of design points increases.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it