Paper detail

Double-estimation-friendly inference for high-dimensional misspecified models

All models may be wrong -- but that is not necessarily a problem for inference. Consider the standard $t$-test for the significance of a variable $X$ for predicting response $Y$ whilst controlling for $p$ other covariates $Z$ in a random design linear model. This yields correct asymptotic type~I error control for the null hypothesis that $X$ is conditionally independent of $Y$ given $Z$ under an \emph{arbitrary} regression model of $Y$ on $(X, Z)$, provided that a linear regression model for $X$ on $Z$ holds. An analogous robustness to misspecification, which we term the "double-estimation-friendly" (DEF) property, also holds for Wald tests in generalised linear models, with some small modifications. In this expository paper we explore this phenomenon, and propose methodology for high-dimensional regression settings that respects the DEF property. We advocate specifying (sparse) generalised linear regression models for both $Y$ and the covariate of interest $X$; our framework gives valid inference for the conditional independence null if either of these hold. In the special case where both specifications are linear, our proposal amounts to a small modification of the popular debiased Lasso test. We also investigate constructing confidence intervals for the regression coefficient of $X$ via inverting our tests; these have coverage guarantees even in partially linear models where the contribution of $Z$ to $Y$ can be arbitrary. Numerical experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of the methodology.

preprint2022arXivOpen 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.