MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Kernel Ridge-Type Shrinkage Estimators in Partially Linear Regression Models with Correlated Errors

2025· preprint· en· W4409287703 on OpenAlexfundno aff
S. Ejaz Ahmed, Ersin Yılmaz, Dursun Aydın

Bibliographic record

VenuePreprints.org · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsShrinkageRidgeEstimatorKernel (algebra)Linear regressionMathematicsRegressionStatisticsLinear modelType (biology)EconometricsArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceGeologyCombinatoricsPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper introduces ridge‐type kernel smoothing estimators for par-tially linear time‐series models that employ shrinkage estimation to han-dle autoregressive errors and severe multicollinearity in the parametric component. By combining a generalized ridge penalty with kernel smoothing, the proposed estimators solve inflated variances arising from linear dependencies among predictors, while also accounting for auto-correlation. Four well-known selection criteria—Generalized Cross Val-idation (GCV), Improved Akaike Information Criterion (AICc), Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC), and Risk Estimation via Classical Pilots (RECP)—are used to optimally choose both the bandwidth and shrinkage parameters. We provide closed‐form expressions for these estimators, establish their asymptotic properties, and present a risk‐based analysis that highlights the benefits of ordinary and positive‐part shrinkage ex-tensions. Simulation studies confirm that the introduced shrinkage ap-proaches outperforms standard methods when predictors are strongly correlated, with this advantage growing as sample sizes increase. An ap-plication to airline delay time‐series data further illustrates the efficacy and practical interpretability of the introduced methodology.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.606
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.241
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePreprints.orgSame topicStatistical Methods and InferenceFrench-language works237,207