MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Conditional canonical correlation estimation based on covariates with random forests

2021· article· en· W3108043540 on OpenAlexafffund
Cansu Alakuş, Denis Larocque, Sébastien Jacquemont, Fanny Barlaam, Charles-Olivier Martin, Kristian Agbogba, Sarah Lippé, Aurélie Labbe

Bibliographic record

VenueBioinformatics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineHEC Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCovariateCanonical correlationCorrelationStatisticsRandom forestMathematicsComputer scienceData miningArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MOTIVATION: Investigating the relationships between two sets of variables helps to understand their interactions and can be done with canonical correlation analysis (CCA). However, the correlation between the two sets can sometimes depend on a third set of covariates, often subject-related ones such as age, gender or other clinical measures. In this case, applying CCA to the whole population is not optimal and methods to estimate conditional CCA, given the covariates, can be useful. RESULTS: We propose a new method called Random Forest with Canonical Correlation Analysis (RFCCA) to estimate the conditional canonical correlations between two sets of variables given subject-related covariates. The individual trees in the forest are built with a splitting rule specifically designed to partition the data to maximize the canonical correlation heterogeneity between child nodes. We also propose a significance test to detect the global effect of the covariates on the relationship between two sets of variables. The performance of the proposed method and the global significance test is evaluated through simulation studies that show it provides accurate canonical correlation estimations and well-controlled Type-1 error. We also show an application of the proposed method with EEG data. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: RFCCA is implemented in a freely available R package on CRAN (https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=RFCCA). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.952
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.229 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations28
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioinformaticsSame topicFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesFrench-language works237,207