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:摘要研究通用高维正则化理论,未提供足以归入所列应用领域细分的证据。

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
Yingying Fan
Jinchi Lv

阈值化参数空间中正则化方法的渐近等价性

研究问题
在高维广义线性模型中,凸与凹惩罚方法的预测和变量选择表现如何比较,维度增长速度是否改变其渐近关系?
方法与思路
作者在阈值化参数空间内研究一般惩罚函数,为全局最小化解建立不同损失下的预言不等式,并讨论可计算解的抽样性质。
材料陈述的贡献
摘要称,多项式维度增长时 Lasso 与凹惩罚方法具有相同收敛率;指数增长时,凹惩罚方法彼此等价且收敛率快于 Lasso。
阅读关注点
应核对阈值化空间的定义、维度增长与设计条件、各损失对应的收敛率,以及全局最小化解和可计算解之间的关系。
阅读边界
仅据 OpenAlex 索引摘要,稿件版本未注明,不能推断刊本变化。摘要未给出具体条件与收敛率,不能据此断言凹惩罚普遍优于 Lasso。

原文摘要

High-dimensional data analysis has motivated a spectrum of regularization methods for variable selection and sparse modeling, with two popular methods being convex and concave ones. A long debate has taken place on whether one class dominates the other, an important question both in theory and to practitioners. In this article, we characterize the asymptotic equivalence of regularization methods, with general penalty functions, in a thresholded parameter space under the generalized linear model setting, where the dimensionality can grow exponentially with the sample size. To assess their performance, we establish the oracle inequalities—as in Bickel, Ritov, and Tsybakov (2009 Bickel, P. J., Ritov, Y. and Tsybakov, A. 2009. “Simultaneous Analysis of Lasso and Dantzig Selector,”. The Annals of Statistics, 37: 1705–1732. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar])—of the global minimizer for these methods under various prediction and variable selection losses. These results reveal an interesting phase transition phenomenon. For polynomially growing dimensionality, the L 1-regularization method of Lasso and concave methods are asymptotically equivalent, having the same convergence rates in the oracle inequalities. For exponentially growing dimensionality, concave methods are asymptotically equivalent but have faster convergence rates than the Lasso. We also establish a stronger property of the oracle risk inequalities of the regularization methods, as well as the sampling properties of computable solutions. Our new theoretical results are illustrated and justified by simulation and real data examples.

笔记与分组
相关领域论文