MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Optimal Penalized Function-on-Function Regression Under a Reproducing Kernel Hilbert Space Framework

2018· article· en· W6958747777 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReproducing kernel Hilbert spaceRepresenter theoremHilbert spaceEstimatorMinimaxFunctional data analysisSubspace topologyNonparametric regressionLeast-squares function approximationSobolev space

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many scientific studies collect data where the response and predictor variables are both functions of time, location, or some other covariate. Understanding the relationship between these functional variables is a common goal in these studies. Motivated from two real-life examples, we present in this article a function-on-function regression model that can be used to analyze such kind of functional data. Our estimator of the 2D coefficient function is the optimizer of a form of penalized least squares where the penalty enforces a certain level of smoothness on the estimator. Our first result is the representer theorem which states that the exact optimizer of the penalized least squares actually resides in a data-adaptive finite-dimensional subspace although the optimization problem is defined on a function space of infinite dimensions. This theorem then allows us an easy incorporation of the Gaussian quadrature into the optimization of the penalized least squares, which can be carried out through standard numerical procedures. We also show that our estimator achieves the minimax convergence rate in mean prediction under the framework of function-on-function regression. Extensive simulation studies demonstrate the numerical advantages of our method over the existing ones, where a sparse functional data extension is also introduced. The proposed method is then applied to our motivating examples of the benchmark Canadian weather data and a histone regulation study. Supplementary materials for this article are available online.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.141
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.250 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicStatistical Methods and InferenceFrench-language works237,207