Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25126067›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in computational neuroscience2014

Analysis of sampling artifacts on the Granger causality analysis for topology extraction of neuronal dynamics.

Douglas Zhou, Yaoyu Zhang, Yanyang Xiao, David Cai

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in computational neuroscience, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 29% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Granger Causality: A Review and Recent Advances.Annual review of statistics and its application · 2022
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Causal Discovery from Temporally Aggregated Time Series.Uncertainty in artificial intelligence : proceedings of the ... conference. Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence · 2017
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Douglas ZhouDepartment of Mathematics, MOE-LSC, and Institute of Natural Sciences, Shanghai Jiao Tong University Shanghai, China.
Yaoyu ZhangDepartment of Mathematics, MOE-LSC, and Institute of Natural Sciences, Shanghai Jiao Tong University Shanghai, China.
Yanyang XiaoDepartment of Mathematics, MOE-LSC, and Institute of Natural Sciences, Shanghai Jiao Tong University Shanghai, China.
David CaiDepartment of Mathematics, MOE-LSC, and Institute of Natural Sciences, Shanghai Jiao Tong University Shanghai, China ; Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences and Center for Neural Science, New York University New York, NY, USA ; NYUAD Institute, New York University Abu Dhabi Abu Dhabi, UAE.
Shanghai Jiao Tong University · CNCourant Institute of Mathematical Sciences · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Granger causality (GC) is a powerful method for causal inference for time series. In general, the GC value is computed using discrete time series sampled from continuous-time processes with a certain sampling interval length τ, i.e., the GC value is a function of τ. Using the GC analysis for the topology extraction of the simplest integrate-and-fire neuronal network of two neurons, we discuss behaviors of the GC value as a function of τ, which exhibits (i) oscillations, often vanishing at certain finite sampling interval lengths, (ii) the GC vanishes linearly as one uses finer and finer sampling. We show that these sampling effects can occur in both linear and non-linear dynamics: the GC value may vanish in the presence of true causal influence or become non-zero in the absence of causal influence. Without properly taking this issue into account, GC analysis may produce unreliable conclusions about causal influence when applied to empirical data. These sampling artifacts on the GC value greatly complicate the reliability of causal inference using the GC analysis, in general, and the validity of topology reconstruction for networks, in particular. We use idealized linear models to illustrate possible mechanisms underlying these phenomena and to gain insight into the general spectral structures that give rise to these sampling effects. Finally, we present an approach to circumvent these sampling artifacts to obtain reliable GC values.

Indexed as

causal inferenceGranger causalityneuronal dynamicsreliabilitysampling ratetopology extraction

Identifiers

PMID25126067
PMCPMC4115622
OpenAlexW2101365715

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.