Detecting Change Points of Covariance Matrices in High Dimensions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Testing for change points in sequences of high-dimensional covariance matrices is an important and equally challenging problem in statistical methodology with applications in various fields. Motivated by the observation that even in cases where the ratio between dimension and sample size is as small as $0.05$, tests based on a fixed-dimension asymptotics do not keep their preassigned level, we propose to derive critical values of test statistics using an asymptotic regime where the dimension diverges at the same rate as the sample size. This paper introduces a novel and well-founded statistical methodology for detecting change points in a sequence of high-dimensional covariance matrices. Our approach utilizes a min-type statistic based on a sequential process of likelihood ratio statistics. This is used to construct a test for the hypothesis of the existence of a change point with a corresponding estimator for its location. We provide theoretical guarantees for these inference tools by thoroughly analyzing the asymptotic properties of the sequential process of likelihood ratio statistics in the case where the dimension and sample size converge with the same rate to infinity. In particular, we prove weak convergence towards a Gaussian process under the null hypothesis of no change. To identify the challenging dependency structure between consecutive test statistics, we employ tools from random matrix theory and stochastic processes. Moreover, we show that the new test attains power under a class of alternatives reflecting changes in the bulk of the spectrum, and we prove consistency of the estimator for the change-point location.
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 | 0.012 | 0.114 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".