Inference from multivariate differential recruitment in respondent-driven sampling data

Vanesa Reinoso; Danilo Alvares; Jonathan Acosta; Isabelle S. Beaudry

Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2604.10018

Inference from multivariate differential recruitment in respondent-driven sampling data

Vanesa Reinoso·Danilo Alvares·Jonathan Acosta·Isabelle S. Beaudry

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Respondent-Driven Sampling (RDS) is a chain-referral design used for collecting data from hidden or hard-to-reach populations through their social networks. In RDS, respondents recruit their peers from the population of interest. As such, inference with RDS data commonly relies on estimated sampling probabilities derived from specific recruitment assumptions. Early literature assumes random recruitment, which is often unrealistic because individuals may recruit based on their personal preferences. This behavior is known as Differential Recruitment (DR). Recent works have incorporated univariate categorical DR in the estimation procedures. The main objective of this paper is to introduce Multivariate Differential Recruitment (MDR), a framework that incorporates multiple simultaneous covariates, both categorical and continuous, into the sampling representation. We model RDS as a Markov process with transition probabilities that depend on continuous or categorical variables associated with nodes or their ties. We then extend various prevalence estimators to this multivariate framework and implement a slightly modified neighborhood bootstrap for variance estimation. The proposed methodology is assessed through simulation studies for a range of network and sampling features. It is applied to an RDS study conducted among the adult Venezuelan population living in the Metropolitan Region of Santiago, Chile.

Explore related subjects

stat.ME

Keep this discovery

BibTeX RIS

Vanesa Reinoso, Danilo Alvares, Jonathan Acosta, Isabelle S. Beaudry. 2026-04-11. Inference from multivariate differential recruitment in respondent-driven sampling data. https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.10018

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↗