Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Double-Estimation-Friendly Inference for High-Dimensional Measurement Error Models with Non-Sparse Adaptability

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2409.16463 v3 pith:LBRHWM3C submitted 2024-09-24 stat.ME math.STstat.TH

classification stat.MEmath.STstat.TH
keywords high-dimensionalmodelsanalysisasymptoticmeasurementmethodnormalityrobust
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

In this paper, we introduce an innovative testing procedure for assessing individual hypotheses in high-dimensional linear regression models with measurement errors. This method remains robust even when either the X-model or Y-model is misspecified. We develop a double robust score function that maintains a zero expectation if one of the models is incorrect, and we construct a corresponding score test. We first show the asymptotic normality of our approach in a low-dimensional setting, and then extend it to the high-dimensional models. Our analysis of high-dimensional settings explores scenarios both with and without the sparsity condition, establishing asymptotic normality and non-trivial power performance under local alternatives. Simulation studies and real data analysis demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed method.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. A Short Note of Comparison between Convex and Non-convex Penalized Likelihood

    stat.ME 2025-02 conditional novelty 2.0 of 10

    Lasso is convex and fast but biased; SCAD and MCP reduce bias but are non-convex and slower, so method choice depends on context.

Pith tools