Blair Bilodeau's Contribution to the Discussion of ‘Assumption-Lean Inference for Generalised Linear Model Parameters’ by Vansteelandt and Dukes
Blair Bilodeau 对“广义线性模型参数的弱假设推断”的讨论AI 解读 ↓
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。
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:材料讨论一般广义线性模型与机器学习的理论条件,未明确涉及所列经济计量应用方向。
Blair Bilodeau 对“广义线性模型参数的弱假设推断”的讨论AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
I commend Vansteelandt and Dukes for (a) advocating that statistics move beyond well-specified assumptions and (b) providing a practical estimator to address this for generalised linear models (GLMs). Furthermore, their derivation of theoretical guarantees for this estimator is highly attractive. However, the theorem assumptions exclude many standard machine learning methods, which may violate the spirit of ‘assumption-lean’ inference guarantees. Theorems 2 and 4 assume that the three (non-parametric) conditional mean estimates have expected square loss converging at rate strictly faster than n − 1/2. Theorem 7 of Rakhlin et al. (2017) can be extended to show that if the empirical L2 entropy of the model class depends on the scale ε ∈ (0, 1) at rate ε − p for some p > 0, then the minimax expected square loss is lower bounded by n − 2/(p+2) even in the well-specified setting. That is, in order for the theory of Vansteelandt and Dukes to apply without additional assumptions, the three conditional mean models must each be strictly Donsker (p < 2), and this cannot be readily side-stepped using sample splitting as Vansteelandt and Dukes do elsewhere. The strict Donsker assumption is satisfied by models with the number of ‘parameters’ (e.g. weights of a neural network) growing strictly slower than n. However, a fixed number of parameters is exactly a parametric assumption, and in practice the number of parameters in machine learning models is often larger than n (corresponding to the interpolation regime, see Belkin et al., 2019). In the interpolation regime, such models are better understood from a non-parametric perspective; unfortunately, this means that they suffer from an exponential dependence on the dimension of the inputs. For linear models, the dimension-free entropy growth rate is ε − 2 (Mendelson & Schechtman, 2004; Zhang, 2002), and consequently, the present theory does not apply. For integer α and γ ∈ (0, 1], entropy for the class of (α, γ)-Hölder smooth functions on Rd grows at rate ε − d/(α+γ) (Wainwright, 2019, Example 5.11), requiring univariate inputs to apply the present theory in the Lipschitz (α = 0, γ = 1) setting. These examples include neural networks with linear and Lipschitz activations, as well as certain variants of random forests (Mourtada et al., 2020). In the notation of Vansteelandt and Dukes, the input dimension corresponds to the dimension of A and L jointly, and in practice L can be quite high dimensional. The authors clearly acknowledge that their convergence requirements may not be satisfied by ‘very flexible machine learning methods’. However, these requirements exclude many methods of interest, including standard neural network and random forest architectures. Ultimately, it remains an interesting open question whether Vansteelandt and Dukes' estimator enjoys convergence guarantees (even with appropriately slow rates) when used with such canonical nonparametric methods.