Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Interpolators are unstable. For example, the minimum [Formula: see text] norm least squares interpolator exhibits unbounded test errors when dealing with noisy data. In this paper, we study how ensemble stabilizes and thus improves the generalization performance, measured by the out-of-sample prediction risk, of an individual interpolator. We focus on bagged linear interpolators, as bagging is a popular randomization-based ensemble method that can be implemented in parallel. We introduce the multiplier-bootstrap-based bagged least squares estimator, which can then be formulated as an average of the sketched least squares estimators. The proposed multiplier bootstrap encompasses the classical bootstrap with replacement as a special case, along with a more intriguing variant which we call the Bernoulli bootstrap. Focusing on the proportional regime where the sample size scales proportionally with the feature dimensionality, we investigate the out-of-sample prediction risks of the sketched and bagged least squares estimators in both underparametrized and overparameterized regimes. Our results reveal the statistical roles of sketching and bagging. In particular, sketching modifies the aspect ratio and shifts the interpolation threshold of the minimum [Formula: see text] norm estimator. However, the risk of the sketched estimator continues to be unbounded around the interpolation threshold due to excessive variance. In stark contrast, bagging effectively mitigates this variance, leading to a bounded limiting out-of-sample prediction risk. To further understand this stability improvement property, we establish that bagging acts as a form of implicit regularization, substantiated by the equivalence of the bagged estimator with its explicitly regularized counterpart. We also discuss several extensions.
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 | 0.006 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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".