Selective Sequential Model Selection

William Fithian; Jonathan Taylor; Robert Tibshirani; Ryan Tibshirani

Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1512.02565

Selective Sequential Model Selection

William Fithian·Jonathan Taylor·Robert Tibshirani·Ryan Tibshirani

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Many model selection algorithms produce a path of fits specifying a sequence of increasingly complex models. Given such a sequence and the data used to produce them, we consider the problem of choosing the least complex model that is not falsified by the data. Extending the selected-model tests of Fithian et al. (2014), we construct p-values for each step in the path which account for the adaptive selection of the model path using the data. In the case of linear regression, we propose two specific tests, the max-t test for forward stepwise regression (generalizing a proposal of Buja and Brown (2014)), and the next-entry test for the lasso. These tests improve on the power of the saturated-model test of Tibshirani et al. (2014), sometimes dramatically. In addition, our framework extends beyond linear regression to a much more general class of parametric and nonparametric model selection problems. To select a model, we can feed our single-step p-values as inputs into sequential stopping rules such as those proposed by G'Sell et al. (2013) and Li and Barber (2015), achieving control of the familywise error rate or false discovery rate (FDR) as desired. The FDR-controlling rules require the null p-values to be independent of each other and of the non-null p-values, a condition not satisfied by the saturated-model p-values of Tibshirani et al. (2014). We derive intuitive and general sufficient conditions for independence, and show that our proposed constructions yield independent p-values.

Explore related subjects

stat.ME stat.ML

Keep this discovery

BibTeX RIS

William Fithian, Jonathan Taylor, Robert Tibshirani, Ryan Tibshirani. 2015-12-08. Selective Sequential Model Selection. https://arxiv.org/abs/1512.02565

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Surprise Reduction and Nullification in Bayesian and Inverse Bayesian Inference under Ambiguous Prediction-Error Attribution

In non-stationary environments, prediction errors may signal environmental change or transient outliers, and adaptive systems must track such changes without overreacting to outliers. We distinguish surprise reduction, which updates beliefs to fit observations, from surprise nullification, which weakens constraints imposed by the predictive structure, and formalize both within Bayesian and inverse Bayesian (BIB) inference. Belief and likelihood updates are derived from variational objectives sharing a nullification strength, determined endogenously by minimizing surprise under the candidate post-update predictive distribution. In the Gaussian case, nullification expands belief and likelihood variances by a common factor relative to standard Bayesian updating, leaving the ratio unchanged. BIB thus defers attribution of the prediction error, committing to neither latent-state change nor observation-process uncertainty. The nullification strength is carried over as a candidate and is maintained or released according to the predictive surprise of the next observation. In a mean estimation task with outliers and changepoints, no scanned parameter setting of a Sage-Husa-type adaptive Kalman filter, fixed-strength BIB variant, or belief-forgetting-only variant outperforms BIB in both changepoint tracking and post-outlier stability. An oracle-informed reduced Bayesian model tracks changepoints better but is less stable after outliers. Although BIB maintains no explicit hypotheses about changepoints or outliers, it generates event-dependent dynamics. The learning rate increases after changepoints, whereas after outliers, nullification is released, and this increase is suppressed. Deferring attribution and letting subsequent observations differentiate the responses may constitute a principle of adaptive inference in non-stationary environments.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2026

Generalized Ridge Refitting for the Lasso and Prediction Improvement Bounds

We study a class of Lasso based estimators obtained by applying a quadratic correction on the Lasso equicorrelation set. The penalty matrix determines both the magnitude and geometry of the correction and contains, among other cases, the isotropic Lasso--Ridge correction, least squares refitting, Gram proportional interpolation between the Lasso and least squares, and coordinate specific penalties. We first derive a closed form representation and isolate the positive gain component of the resulting prediction improvement. We then control the remaining stochastic linear term in expectation by localizing the random signed equicorrelation model around a deterministic reference support. This yields a finite sample expectation bound that explicitly accounts for the randomness induced by Lasso model selection. The resulting decomposition provides a unified framework for understanding when Lasso based quadratic corrections can improve prediction.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2026

Discretization in covariate-adaptive randomization: gains and losses

Covariate-adaptive randomization(CAR) is widely implemented in clinical trials to balance prognostic covariates across treatment arms. Continuous covariates are often discretized into strata in practice, yet their consequences are not clearly understood. This paper provides a comprehensive study of the impact of discretization on both the CAR design process and the inferential results thereafter. We establish the asymptotic properties of both imbalance measures and treatment effect estimators under discretized and non-discretized settings. Practical recommendations are given on when and how discretization should be employed. We show that discretization in design is generally recommended, as it enhances robustness against model misspecification. However, if the true model is known, the most efficient strategy is to balance covariates according to that model in the design. The theoretical results are corroborated by extensive simulation studies and an empirical application to a diabetes trial dataset. Together, the results clarify the gains and losses of discretization in CAR and pave the way for learning impact of discretization to other designs and beyond.

stat.ME↗