mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Random features models: a way to study the success of naive imputation

arXiv 2402.03839 ↗First posted 6 Feb 2024math.ST stat.ML stat.THcited by 7

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Constant (naive) imputation is still widely used in practice as this is a first easy-to-use technique to deal with missing data. Yet, this simple method could be expected to induce a large bias for prediction purposes, as the imputed input may strongly differ from the true underlying data. However, recent works suggest that this bias is low in the context of high-dimensional linear predictors when data is supposed to be missing completely at random (MCAR). This paper completes the picture for linear predictors by confirming the intuition that the bias is negligible and that surprisingly naive imputation also remains relevant in very low dimension.To this aim, we consider a unique underlying random features model, which offers a rigorous framework for studying predictive performances, whilst the dimension of the observed features varies.Building on these theoretical results, we establish finite-sample bounds on stochastic gradient (SGD) predictors applied to zero-imputed data, a strategy particularly well suited for large-scale learning.If the MCAR assumption appears to be strong, we show that similar favorable behaviors occur for more complex missing data scenarios.

Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 13 of its 36 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 6 Feb 2024.

Builds on

13 of 36 references.

References · 13

  1. 2019Surprises in High-Dimensional Ridgeless Least Squares Interpolationcited by 508
  2. 2014Breaking the Curse of Dimensionality with Convex Neural Networkscited by 329
  3. 2016Generalization Properties of Learning with Random Featurescited by 163
  4. 2013Non-strongly-convex smooth stochastic approximation with convergence rate O(1/n)cited by 110
  5. 2013Early stopping and non-parametric regression: An optimal data-dependent stopping rulecited by 86
  6. 2016Harder, Better, Faster, Stronger Convergence Rates for Least-Squares Regressioncited by 64
  7. 2021What's a good imputation to predict with missing values?cited by 61
  8. 2019On the consistency of supervised learning with missing valuescited by 52
  9. 2018Learning with SGD and Random Featurescited by 33
  10. 2019On Robustness of Principal Component Regressioncited by 27
  11. 2022Benchmarking missing-values approaches for predictive models on health databasescited by 23
  12. 2020Linear predictor on linearly-generated data with missing values: non consistency and solutionscited by 20
1 more
  1. 2022An elementary analysis of ridge regression with random designcited by 15

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 1; 2025: 4; 2026: 2.

7 papers.