MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416887875 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2504.18695

Local Polynomial Lp-norm Regression

2025· preprint· en· W4416887875 on OpenAlexaff
Ladan Tazik, James E. Stafford, John Braun

Bibliographic record

VenueArXiv.org · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Statistical Methods and Models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusOkanagan College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolynomial regressionEstimatorLeast-squares function approximationLocal regressionPolynomialGeneralized least squaresRegressionTotal least squaresRegression analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The local least squares estimator for a regression curve cannot provide optimal results when non-Gaussian noise is present. Both theoretical and empirical evidence suggests that residuals often exhibit distributional properties different from those of a normal distribution, making it worthwhile to consider estimation based on other norms. It is suggested that $L_p$-norm estimators be used to minimize the residuals when these exhibit non-normal kurtosis. In this paper, we propose a local polynomial $L_p$-norm regression that replaces weighted least squares estimation with weighted $L_p$-norm estimation for fitting the polynomial locally. We also introduce a new method for estimating the parameter $p$ from the residuals, enhancing the adaptability of the approach. Through numerical and theoretical investigation, we demonstrate our method's superiority over local least squares in one-dimensional data and show promising outcomes for higher dimensions, specifically in 2D.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.191
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArXiv.orgSame topicAdvanced Statistical Methods and ModelsFrench-language works237,207