Comparison of Canonical Correlation and Partial Least Squares analyses of simulated and empirical data
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
<title>Abstract</title> <bold>Background</bold>With the availability of large datasets containing multiple measures, there has been a renewed interest in applying multivariate statistical analysis. Two methods, Canonical Correlation Analysis (CCA) and Partial Least Squares (PLS) have been used most frequently given their historical links to classic statistical modelling of the dimensions that relate to two data blocks. Though similar in the decomposition of the cross-block structure, there are important differences in specific steps. In this paper, we apply the most general form of CCA and PLS to three simulated and two empirical datasets, all having large sample sizes on the order of n=10,000. We take successively smaller subsamples of these data to evaluate sensitivity, reliability, and reproducibility. <bold>Results</bold>In null data having no correlation within or between blocks, both methods showed equivalent false positive rates regardless of sample size. Both methods also showed equivalent detection in data with weak but reliable effects until sample sizes drop below n=50. In the case of strong effects, both methods showed similar performance unless the correlations of items within one data block were high. In these instances, the reproducibility in CCA declined. This was ameliorated if a principal components analysis (PCA) was performed on a data block and the component scores used to calculate the cross-block matrix. For PLS, the results were reproducible across sample sizes for strong and moderate cross-block effects, regardless of the within-block correlations, but show lower detectability at small sample sizes (n=20). <bold>Conclusions</bold>The general outcome of our examination gives three messages. First, for data with low within and high between block structure, CCA and PLS give comparable results, with equivalent sensitivity and false positive rate. Second, if there are high correlations within either block, this can compromise the reliability of CCA results. This can be remedied with PCA before cross-block calculation. However, this assumes that the PCA structure is stable for a given sample. Third, statistical significance by null hypothesis testing does not guarantee that the results are reproducible, even with large sample sizes. This final outcome suggests that researchers should routinely assess both statistical significance and reproducibility for their data.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle