The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Least Squares After Model Selection in High-Dimensional Sparse Models
Open accessAbstract
In this article we study post-model selection estimators that apply ordinary least squares (OLS) to the model selected by first-step penalized estimators, typically Lasso. It is well known that Lasso can estimate the nonparametric regression function at nearly the oracle rate, and is thus hard to improve upon. We show that the OLS post-Lasso estimator performs at least as well as Lasso in terms of the rate of convergence, and has the advantage of a smaller bias. Remarkably, this performance occurs even if the Lasso-based model selection “fails” in the sense of missing some components of the “true” regression model. By the “true” model, we mean the best $s$-dimensional approximation to the nonparametric regression function chosen by the oracle. Furthermore, OLS post-Lasso estimator can perform strictly better than Lasso, in the sense of a strictly faster rate of convergence, if the Lasso-based model selection correctly includes all components of the “true” model as a subset and also achieves sufficient sparsity. In the extreme case, when Lasso perfectly selects the “true” model, the OLS post-Lasso estimator becomes the oracle estimator. An important ingredient in our analysis is a new sparsity bound on the dimension of the model selected by Lasso, which guarantees that this dimension is at most of the same order as the dimension of the “true” model. Our rate results are nonasymptotic and hold in both parametric and nonparametric models. Moreover, our analysis is not limited to the Lasso estimator acting as a selector in the first step, but also applies to any other estimator, for example, various forms of thresholded Lasso, with good rates and good sparsity properties. Our analysis covers both traditional thresholding and a new practical, data-driven thresholding scheme that induces additional sparsity subject to maintaining a certain goodness of fit. The latter scheme has theoretical guarantees similar to those of Lasso or OLS post-Lasso, but it dominates those procedures as well as traditional thresholding in a wide variety of experiments.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Regression shrinkage and selection via the lasso
Tibshirani, R. (1996) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology · doi:10.1111/j.2517-6161.1996.tb02080.x · Cited by 51,482
Cited by
Inference on Treatment Effects after Selection among High-Dimensional Controls
Belloni, A., Chernozhukov, V., & Hansen, C. (2014) · The Review of Economic Studies · doi:10.1093/restud/rdt044 · Cited by 1,508
Self-citationCovariate Balancing Propensity Score
Imai, K., & Ratkovic, M. (2014) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology · doi:10.1111/rssb.12027 · Cited by 1,315
Sparse Models and Methods for Optimal Instruments With an Application to Eminent Domain
(2012) · Econometrica · doi:10.3982/ecta9626 · Cited by 889
High-Dimensional Methods and Inference on Structural and Treatment Effects
Belloni, A., Chernozhukov, V., & Hansen, C. (2014) · Journal of Economic Perspectives · doi:10.1257/jep.28.2.29 · Cited by 722
Self-citationTaming the Factor Zoo: A Test of New Factors
FENG, G., GIGLIO, S., & XIU, D. (2020) · The Journal of Finance · doi:10.1111/jofi.12883 · Cited by 707
Metadata
- Authors
- Belloni, A., & Chernozhukov, V.
- Venue
- SSRN Electronic Journal
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2009
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 521-547
- ISSN
- 1350-7265 (ISSN-L)
- 1556-5068
- OpenAlex
- W3103221895
- Cited by
- 683
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 1.91
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.