Comparing Model-agnostic Feature Selection Methods through Relative Efficiency

Chenghui Zheng, Garvesh Raskutti
8/19/2025
stat.MLcs.LGstat.ME

No confident code implementation found for this paper.

Abstract

Feature selection and importance estimation in a model-agnostic setting is an ongoing challenge of significant interest. Wrapper methods are commonly used because they are typically model-agnostic, even though they are computationally intensive. In this paper, we focus on feature selection methods related to the Generalized Covariance Measure (GCM) and Leave-One-Covariate-Out (LOCO) estimation, and provide a comparison based on relative efficiency. In particular, we present a theoretical comparison under three model settings: linear models, non-linear additive models, and single index models that mimic a single-layer neural network. We complement this with extensive simulations and real data examples. Our theoretical results, along with empirical findings, demonstrate that GCM-related methods generally outperform LOCO under suitable regularity conditions. Furthermore, we quantify the asymptotic relative efficiency of these approaches. Our simulations and real data analysis include widely used machine learning methods such as neural networks and gradient boosting trees.

View on arXivView PDF

Code Implementations

No confident code match yet

We couldn't find an author-owned or strongly-evidenced community implementation for this paper. Any repos shown below are weak matches — verify before relying on them.

No code implementations found yet.

Know of an implementation? Let us know in the comments below!

Similar Papers

Cite this paper

@article{zheng2025comparing,
  title  = {Comparing Model-agnostic Feature Selection Methods through Relative Efficiency},
  author = {Chenghui Zheng and Garvesh Raskutti},
  year   = {2025},
  eprint = {2508.14268},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2508.14268v1}
}

Add a badge to your README

Shows whether official code is linked for this paper.

Code of Paper badge
[![Code of Paper](https://codeofpaper.com/badge/2508.14268.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2508.14268)

Discussion