Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33716305›Full record

ArticleThe American statistician2021

Sampling Strategies for Fast Updating of Gaussian Markov Random Fields.

D Andrew Brown, Christopher S McMahan, Stella Watson Self

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The American statistician, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Bayesian Spatial Binary Regression for Label Fusion in Structural Neuroimaging.Journal of the American Statistical Association · 2022
    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.

D Andrew BrownSchool of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences, Clemson University, Clemson, SC, USA 29634-0975.
Christopher S McMahanSchool of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences, Clemson University.
Stella Watson SelfSchool of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences, Clemson University.

Funding

Group testing for infectious disease detection: multiplex assays and back-end screeningR01AI121351 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA LINCOLN · PI BILDER, CHRISTOPHER R · 2016 to 2025
$3.3M
NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI121351
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gaussian Markov random fields (GMRFs) are popular for modeling dependence in large areal datasets due to their ease of interpretation and computational convenience afforded by the sparse precision matrices needed for random variable generation. Typically in Bayesian computation, GMRFs are updated jointly in a block Gibbs sampler or componentwise in a single-site sampler via the full conditional distributions. The former approach can speed convergence by updating correlated variables all at once, while the latter avoids solving large matrices. We consider a sampling approach in which the underlying graph can be cut so that conditionally independent sites are updated simultaneously. This algorithm allows a practitioner to parallelize updates of subsets of locations or to take advantage of 'vectorized' calculations in a high-level language such as R. Through both simulated and real data, we demonstrate computational savings that can be achieved versus both single-site and block updating, regardless of whether the data are on a regular or an irregular lattice. The approach provides a good compromise between statistical and computational efficiency and is accessible to statisticians without expertise in numerical analysis or advanced computing.

Indexed as

Bayesian computationCholesky factorizationchromatic Gibbs samplingconditional autoregressive modelgraph coloringMarkov chain Monte Carlo

Identifiers

PMID33716305
PMCPMC7954130

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.