Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25811988›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

How many separable sources? Model selection in independent components analysis.

Roger P Woods, Lars Kai Hansen, Stephen Strother

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

3 authors.

Roger P WoodsDepartments of Neurology and of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine at the University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, United States of America.
Lars Kai HansenDepartment of Applied Mathematics and Computer Science, Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark.
Stephen StrotherRotman Research Institute, Baycrest, and Department of Medical Biophysics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.

Funding

YALE CENTER FOR THE: LEARNING &ATTENTIONP41RR013642 · NCRR · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI BEARER, ELAINE L · 1998 to 2011
$21.9M
TR&D3: Intrinsic Surface MappingP41EB015922 · NIBIB · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI VAN HORN, JOHN DARRELL · 2012 to 2022
$14.1M
SPATIAL AND TEMPORAL PATTERNS OF FUNCTIONAL ACTIVATIONP20EB002013 · NIBIB · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA TWIN CITIES · PI ROTTENBERG, DAVID ALLAN · 2003 to 2005
$4.0M
EXTRAMURAL RESEARCH FACILITIES CONSTRUCTIONC06RR012169 · NCRR · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI MAZZIOTTA, JOHN C · 1996 to 1997
–
NCRR NIH HHS C06 RR012169NCRR NIH HHS P41 RR013642NIBIB NIH HHS P20 EB002013NIBIB NIH HHS P20-EB02013NIBIB NIH HHS P41 EB015922NIBIB NIH HHS P41-EB015922
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Unlike mixtures consisting solely of non-Gaussian sources, mixtures including two or more Gaussian components cannot be separated using standard independent components analysis methods that are based on higher order statistics and independent observations. The mixed Independent Components Analysis/Principal Components Analysis (mixed ICA/PCA) model described here accommodates one or more Gaussian components in the independent components analysis model and uses principal components analysis to characterize contributions from this inseparable Gaussian subspace. Information theory can then be used to select from among potential model categories with differing numbers of Gaussian components. Based on simulation studies, the assumptions and approximations underlying the Akaike Information Criterion do not hold in this setting, even with a very large number of observations. Cross-validation is a suitable, though computationally intensive alternative for model selection. Application of the algorithm is illustrated using Fisher's iris data set and Howells' craniometric data set. Mixed ICA/PCA is of potential interest in any field of scientific investigation where the authenticity of blindly separated non-Gaussian sources might otherwise be questionable. Failure of the Akaike Information Criterion in model selection also has relevance in traditional independent components analysis where all sources are assumed non-Gaussian.

Indexed as

Models, StatisticalAlgorithmsHumansLikelihood FunctionsNormal DistributionPrincipal Component AnalysisSkull

Identifiers

PMID25811988
PMCPMC4374758

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.