登录 注册

PPI is the Difference Estimator: Recognizing the Survey Sampling Roots of 预测 (Prediction)-Powered 推断 (Inference)
PPI is the Difference Estimator: Recognizing the Survey Sampling Roots of Prediction-Powered Inference

🔗 访问原文
🔗 Access Paper

📝 摘要
Abstract

预测 (Prediction)-powered inference (PPI) is a rapidly growing framework for combining machine learning predictions with a small set of gold-standard labels to conduct valid statistical inference. In this article, I argue that the core estimators underlying PPI are equivalent to well-established estimators from the survey sampling literature dating back to the 1970s. Specifically, the PPI estimator for a population mean is algebraically equivalent to the difference estimator of Cassel et al. (1976), and PPI plus corresponds to the generalized regression (GREG) estimator of Sarndal et al. (2003). Recognizing this equivalence, I consider what part of PPI is inherited from a long-standing literature in statistics, what part is genuinely new, and where inferential claims require care. After introducing the two frameworks and establishing their equivalence, I break down where PPI diverges from model-assisted estimation, including differences in the mode of inference, the role of the unlabeled data
Prediction-powered inference (PPI) is a rapidly growing framework for combining machine learning predictions with a small set of gold-standard labels to conduct valid statistical inference. In this article, I argue that the core estimators underlying PPI are equivalent to well-established estimators from the survey sampling literature dating back to the 1970s. Specifically, the PPI estimator for a population mean is algebraically equivalent to the difference estimator of Cassel et al. (1976), and PPI plus corresponds to the generalized regression (GREG) estimator of Sarndal et al. (2003). Recognizing this equivalence, I consider what part of PPI is inherited from a long-standing literature in statistics, what part is genuinely new, and where inferential claims require care. After introducing the two frameworks and establishing their equivalence, I break down where PPI diverges from model-assisted estimation, including differences in the mode of inference, the role of the unlabeled data pool, and the consequences of differential prediction error for subgroup estimands such as the average treatment effect. I then identify what each framework offers the other: PPI researchers can draw on the survey sampling literature's well-developed theory of calibration, optimal allocation, and design-based diagnostics, while survey sampling researchers can benefit from PPI's extensions to non-standard estimands and its accessible software ecosystem. The article closes with a call for integration between these two communities, motivated by the growing use of large language models as measurement instruments in applied research.

📊 文章统计
Article Statistics

基础数据
Basic Stats

275 浏览
Views
0 下载
Downloads
5 引用
Citations

引用趋势
Citation Trend

阅读国家分布
Country Distribution

阅读机构分布
Institution Distribution

月度浏览趋势
Monthly Views

相关关键词
Related Keywords

影响因子分析
Impact Analysis

8.70 综合评分
Overall Score
引用影响力
Citation Impact
浏览热度
View Popularity
下载频次
Download Frequency

📄 相关文章
Related Articles

🌊