Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40947992›Full record

ArticlePsychometrika2025

Algebraic Approach to Maximum Likelihood Factor Analysis.

Ryoya Fukasaku, Kei Hirose, Yutaro Kabata, Keisuke Teramoto

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychometrika, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Trial
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.

Ryoya FukasakuFaculty of Mathematics, Kyushu Universityhttps://ror.org/00p4k0j84, Fukuoka, Japan.
Kei HiroseInstitute of Mathematics for Industry, Kyushu Universityhttps://ror.org/00p4k0j84, Fukuoka, Japan.
Yutaro KabataGraduate School of Science and Engineering, Kagoshima Universityhttps://ror.org/03ss88z23, Kagoshima, Japan.
Keisuke TeramotoDepartment of Mathematics, Yamaguchi Universityhttps://ror.org/03cxys317, Yamaguchi, Japan.

Funding

Japan Society for the Promotion of Science JP20K14312,JP21K18312,JP23H04474,JP23K10988,JP25H01482
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In maximum likelihood factor analysis, we need to solve a complicated system of algebraic equations, known as the normal equation, to get maximum likelihood estimates (MLEs). Since this equation is difficult to solve analytically, its solutions are typically computed with continuous optimization methods, such as the Newton-Raphson method. With this procedure, however, the MLEs are dependent on initial values since the log-likelihood function is highly non-concave. Particularly, the estimates of unique variances can result in zero or negative, referred to as improper solutions; in this case, the MLE can be severely unstable. To delve into the issue of the instability, we algebraically compute all candidates for the MLE. We provide an algorithm based on algebraic computations that is carefully designed for maximum likelihood factor analysis. To be specific, Gröbner bases are employed, powerful tools to get simplified sub-problems for given systems of algebraic equations. Our algebraic algorithm provides the MLE independent of the initial values. While computationally demanding, our algebraic approach is applicable to small-scale problems and provides valuable insights into the characterization of improper solutions. For larger-scale problems, we provide numerical methods as practical alternatives to the algebraic approach. We perform numerical experiments to investigate the characteristics of the MLE with our two approaches.

Indexed as

computational algebraGröbner basisimproper solutionsmaximum likelihood factor analysis

Identifiers

PMID40947992
PMCPMC12805208

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.