arXiv Statistics ML By Hammed A. Olayinka, Saheed O. Olayemi

Dynamic Spatial Bayesian Machine Learning Model: Applications to Intergenerational Economic Mobility and Geographic Income Inequality in the United States

Read the original on arXiv Statistics ML →

The paper introduces DSP‑BART‑HS, a Dynamic Spatial Panel Bayesian Additive Regression Trees model with Horseshoe shrinkage, designed for high‑dimensional spatio‑temporal panel data. Across nine simulated scenarios, the model outperforms or matches a wide range of spatial econometric, non‑parametric machine learning, and small‑area estimators, especially when individual‑level non‑linearity drives outcome variance. The authors validate the method on two U.S. county‑level applications—intergenerational economic mobility and geographic income inequality—showing strong predictive accuracy even under unseen‑region, random, and temporal holdouts, while noting a temporal extrapolation advantage for a simpler autoregressive model.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv Statistics ML.

arXiv Machine Learning
Sep 10

Semi-Supervised Learning under Spatially Biased Sampling

arXiv:2609.07982v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Standard semi-supervised learning (SSL) typically relies on labelled and unlabelled data sharing a common marginal distribution. This assumption is oft...

By Bright Wiredu Nuakoh, Francky Fouedjio, Stephen Bradshaw, Yaw Kwaafo Awuah-Mensah, Wei Hong Tan, Emet Arya, Ebenezer Afrifa-Yamoah
arXiv Machine Learning
Sep 2

Do LLMs Know Your Neighborhood? Auditing LLM Priors for Neighborhood-Level Mobility Prediction and Structural Alignment

The study investigates whether large language models (LLMs) can predict neighborhood-level human mobility without training data. Using anonymized Cuebiq data across four U.S. metropolitan areas, the authors compare zero‑shot LLM predictions to supervised baselines for various mobility outcomes and assess structural alignment with empirical trends. Results show supervised models outperform LLMs (average accuracy 0.580 vs. 0.435), with LLMs relying on coarse, stable priors that may exhibit biased treatment of protected-group predictors.

By Saad Mohammad Abrar, Eesha Kurella, Arnav Dadarya, Naman Awasthi, Kazi Tasnim Zinat, Vanessa Frias-Martinez