Bayesian sparse factor regression trees
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
In this thesis, we focus on sparse principal component analysis (PCA) and nonlinear regression problems.We investigate several sparse PCA models and nonlinear regression techniques.We also explore the advantages of applying them sequentially and training them as an integral unit.First, we experiment with three sparse PCA models, which are optimal sparse PCA algorithms (OSPCA), Generalized Power algorithms (GP) and doubly sparse PCA algorithm (DSPCA).All the algorithms are compared using information loss and explained variance metrics, and we investigate their performance with both artificial and real data sets.OSPCA has the best control of the sparsity.GP and DSPCA both perform well on the synthetic and real data sets.The sparse factors identified by DSPCA for the real datasets are the most interpretable.Second, we report the results of experiments designed to test the performance of several nonlinear regression models (Bayesian additive regression trees (BART), random forests, neural networks, Extreme Gradient Boosting) in different scenarios with artificial and real data sets.When the number of predictors is smaller than that of data examples, no model outperforms the others consistently.However, when the data dimension increases, especially when the number of predictors exceeds that of data examples, the ensemble tree models, BART and random forest, are still able to handle the regression problem, whereas neural networks no longer provide a reasonable fit to the data because of the rapid increase in the number of model parameters and a lack of data.Finally, we investigate whether the prediction task can benefit from first applying sparse PCA to data to identify underlying sparse factor patterns and then applying the regression algorithms using the sparse representation of the data.We observe performance improvement for synthetic data.We also modified the inference algorithms of Bayesian DSPCA and BART to train these two models as an integral unit, so that prediction performance can inform the sparse PCA algorithms, guiding them to construct better representations of the data.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it