2012
DOI: 10.1080/02331888.2012.708034
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Variable selection for general transformation models with ranking data

Abstract: In this paper, we consider variable selection problem for general transformation models with ranking data by penalized maximum log-marginal likelihood approach. We incorporate smoothly clipped absolute deviation (SCAD), lasso and hard thresholding penalties into penalty term. With some conditions and proper penalties, we show that the corresponding penalized estimates are √ n-consistent and enjoy oracle properties. We also propose a three-step Monte Carlo Markov chain stochastic approximation algorithm for our… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

1
0

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 35 publications
(80 reference statements)
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…, 0), where β 0 is a p-column vector; Z's were generated from a multivariate Gaussian distribution N (0, V2) with V2 as a p × p matrix with its (i, j)'s element = 0.5 |i−j| . We present a comparison between PVM and some existing methods for the transformation models (Li et al 2014) and the AFT model (Xu et al 2010) under the regular high-dimensional setting with p < n. The corresponding results are summarized in Table 2. As we can see from the table, for Under the ultra high-dimensional settings, we also compare PVM with SIS (Fan et al 2010) and Song et al (2014)'s method for Cox's proportional hazards model and proportional odds model, respectively.…”
Section: Inmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…, 0), where β 0 is a p-column vector; Z's were generated from a multivariate Gaussian distribution N (0, V2) with V2 as a p × p matrix with its (i, j)'s element = 0.5 |i−j| . We present a comparison between PVM and some existing methods for the transformation models (Li et al 2014) and the AFT model (Xu et al 2010) under the regular high-dimensional setting with p < n. The corresponding results are summarized in Table 2. As we can see from the table, for Under the ultra high-dimensional settings, we also compare PVM with SIS (Fan et al 2010) and Song et al (2014)'s method for Cox's proportional hazards model and proportional odds model, respectively.…”
Section: Inmentioning
confidence: 99%