Paper detail

AIC for Non-concave Penalized Likelihood Method

Non-concave penalized maximum likelihood methods, such as the Bridge, the SCAD, and the MCP, are widely used because they not only do parameter estimation and variable selection simultaneously but also have a high efficiency as compared to the Lasso. They include a tuning parameter which controls a penalty level, and several information criteria have been developed for selecting it. While these criteria assure the model selection consistency and so have a high value, it is a severe problem that there are no appropriate rules to choose the one from a class of information criteria satisfying such a preferred asymptotic property. In this paper, we derive an information criterion based on the original definition of the AIC by considering the minimization of the prediction error rather than the model selection consistency. Concretely speaking, we derive a function of the score statistic which is asymptotically equivalent to the non-concave penalized maximum likelihood estimator, and then we provide an asymptotically unbiased estimator of the Kullback-Leibler divergence between the true distribution and the estimated distribution based on the function. Furthermore, through simulation studies, we check that the performance of the proposed information criterion gives almost the same as or better than that of the cross-validation.

preprint2015arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.