Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40969485›Full record

ArticleArXiv2025

Covariance test for discretely observed functional data: when and how it works?

Yang Zhou, Jin Yang, Fang Yao

Abstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in ArXiv, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Yang ZhouSchool of Statistics, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China.
Jin YangBiostatistics and Bioinformatics Branch, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda.
Fang YaoDepartment of Probability & Statistics, School of Mathematical Sciences, Center for Statistical Science, Peking University, Beijing, China.

Funding

Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative - SupplementU01AG024904 · NIA · NORTHERN CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE RES &EDUC · PI WEINER, MICHAEL W · 2004 to 2015
$121.0M
NIA NIH HHS U01 AG024904
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

For covariance test in functional data analysis, existing methods are developed only for fully observed curves, whereas in practice, trajectories are typically observed discretely and with noise. To bridge this gap, we employ a pool-smoothing strategy to construct an FPC-based test statistic, allowing the number of estimated eigenfunctions to grow with the sample size. This yields a consistently nonparametric test, while the challenge arises from the concurrence of diverging truncation and discretized observations. Facilitated by advancing perturbation bounds of estimated eigenfunctions, we establish that the asymptotic null distribution remains valid across permissable truncation levels. Moreover, when the sampling frequency (i.e., the number of measurements per subject) reaches certain magnitude of sample size, the test behaves as if the functions were fully observed. This phase transition phenomenon differs from the well-known result of the pooling mean/covariance estimation, reflecting the elevated difficulty in covariance test due to eigen-decomposition. The numerical studies, including simulations and real data examples, yield favorable performance compared to existing methods.

Indexed as

Diverging truncationFunctional principal componentsPerturbation boundsPhase transition

Identifiers

PMID40969485
PMCPMC12443225

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.