MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379512678 · doi:10.1017/nws.2023.11

Exact recovery of Granger causality graphs with unconditional pairwise tests

2023· article· en· W4379512678 on OpenAlexaff
Ryan Kinnear, Ravi R. Mazumdar

Bibliographic record

VenueNetwork Science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGene Regulatory Network Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPairwise comparisonGranger causalityCausality (physics)HeuristicsHeuristicMathematicsGraphComputer scienceTheoretical computer scienceMathematical optimizationArtificial intelligenceEconometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We study Granger Causality in the context of wide-sense stationary time series. The focus of the analysis is to understand how the underlying topological structure of the causality graph affects graph recovery by means of the pairwise testing heuristic. Our main theoretical result establishes a sufficient condition (in particular, the graph must satisfy a polytree assumption we refer to asstrong causality) under which the graph can be recovered by means of unconditional andbinarypairwise causality testing. Examples from the gene regulatory network literature are provided which establish that graphs which are strongly causal, or very nearly so, can be expected to arise in practice. We implement finite sample heuristics derived from our theory, and use simulation to compare our pairwise testing heuristic against LASSO-based methods. These simulations show that, for graphs which are strongly causal (or small perturbations thereof) the pairwise testing heuristic is able to more accurately recover the underlying graph. We show that the algorithm is scalable to graphs with thousands of nodes, and that, as long as structural assumptions are met, exhibits similar high-dimensional scaling properties as the LASSO. That is, performance degrades slowly while the system size increases and the number of available samples is held fixed. Finally, a proof-of-concept application example shows, by attempting to classify alcoholic individuals using only Granger causality graphs inferred from EEG measurements, that the inferred Granger causality graph topology carries identifiable features.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.040
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.040
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNetwork ScienceSame topicGene Regulatory Network AnalysisFrench-language works237,207