Robust estimators for additive models using backfitting
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
Additive models provide an attractive setup to estimate regression functions in a nonparametric context. They provide a flexible and interpretable model, where each regression function depends only on a single explanatory variable and can be estimated at an optimal univariate rate. Most estimation procedures for these models are highly sensitive to the presence of even a small proportion of outliers in the data. In this paper, we show that a relatively simple robust version of the backfitting algorithm (consisting of using robust local polynomial smoothers) corresponds to the solution of a well-defined optimisation problem. This formulation allows us to find mild conditions to show Fisher consistency and to study the convergence of the algorithm. Our numerical experiments show that the resulting estimators have good robustness and efficiency properties. We illustrate the use of these estimators on a real data set where the robust fit reveals the presence of influential outliers.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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