跳到正文
← 返回论文列表与筛选
阅读说明

本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。

DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。

引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。

关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。

分类依据与纠错

AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要聚焦一般高维线性模型的变量选择,没有宏观预测、收益预测或因果推断的直接证据。

反馈分类问题

正在核对关联版本…

代码、数据与补充材料

正在核对对应版本的资源…

关注这篇论文的作者
Shuaiwen Wang
Haolei Weng
Arian Maleki

哪种桥估计量最适合变量选择?

研究问题
当样本量与预测变量数同阶增长时,先用桥估计量估计系数再阈值筛选,如何在固定真阳性比例下减少错误发现?
方法与思路
作者分析两阶段变量选择的渐近错误发现比例与真阳性比例,结合桥估计量的精确误差刻画比较不同程序。
材料陈述的贡献
摘要称,固定真阳性比例时较小估计均方误差对应较小错误发现比例,并给出大噪声、稀疏弱信号等情形的比较。
阅读关注点
应核对高维渐近模型、信号与设计条件、阈值选择,以及 Ridge、两阶段 LASSO 和其他方法比较的适用范围。
阅读边界
仅据 OpenAlex 索引摘要,稿件版本未注明;摘要未列出完整模型条件,所述优劣比较不能扩展为普遍排名。

原文摘要

We study the problem of variable selection for linear models under the high-dimensional asymptotic setting, where the number of observations $n$ grows at the same rate as the number of predictors $p$. We consider two-stage variable selection techniques (TVS) in which the first stage uses bridge estimators to obtain an estimate of the regression coefficients, and the second stage simply thresholds this estimate to select the “important” predictors. The asymptotic false discovery proportion ($\operatorname{AFDP}$) and true positive proportion (ATPP) of these TVS are evaluated. We prove that for a fixed ATPP, in order to obtain a smaller $\operatorname{AFDP}$, one should pick a bridge estimator with smaller asymptotic mean square error in the first stage of TVS. Based on such principled discovery, we present a sharp comparison of different TVS, via an in-depth investigation of the estimation properties of bridge estimators. Rather than “orderwise” error bounds with loose constants, our analysis focuses on precise error characterization. Various interesting signal-to-noise ratio and sparsity settings are studied. Our results offer new and thorough insights into high-dimensional variable selection. For instance, we prove that a TVS with Ridge in its first stage outperforms TVS with other bridge estimators in large noise settings; two-stage LASSO becomes inferior when the signal is rare and weak. As a by-product, we show that two-stage methods outperform some standard variable selection techniques, such as $\operatorname{LASSO}$ and Sure Independence Screening, under certain conditions.

笔记与分组