FuDGE: Functional Differential Graph Estimation with fully and discretely observed curves.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We consider the problem of estimating the difference between two functional undirected graphical models with shared structures. In many applications, data are naturally regarded as high-dimensional random function vectors rather than multivariate scalars. For example, electroencephalography (EEG) data are more appropriately treated as functions of time. In these problems, not only can the number of functions measured per sample be large, but each function is itself an infinite dimensional object, making estimation of model parameters challenging. In practice, curves are usually discretely observed, which makes graph structure recovery even more challenging. We formally characterize when two functional graphical models are comparable and propose a method that directly estimates the functional differential graph, which we term FuDGE. FuDGE avoids separate estimation of each graph, which allows for estimation in problems where individual graphs are dense, but their difference is sparse. We show that FuDGE consistently estimates the functional differential graph in a high-dimensional setting for both discretely observed and fully observed function paths. We illustrate finite sample properties of our method through simulation studies. In order to demonstrate the benefits of our method, we propose Joint Functional Graphical Lasso as a competitor, which is a generalization of the Joint Graphical Lasso. Finally, we apply our method to EEG data to uncover differences in functional brain connectivity between alcoholics and control subjects.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".