Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42222061›Full record

ArticleIEEE transactions on signal processing : a publication of the IEEE Signal Processing Society2026

Generative Principal Component Regression via Variational Inference.

Austin Talbot, Corey J Keller, Cristina Trevino, David E Carlson, Eric B Dammer, Erik C B Johnson, Thomas S Wingo, Alex V Kotlar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in IEEE transactions on signal processing : a publication of the IEEE Signal Processing Society, 2026. 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

8 authors.

Austin TalbotDepartment of Human Genetics, Emory University, Atlanta GA.
Corey J KellerDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA 94301 USA; Wu Tsai Neurosciences Institute, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA; Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Healthcare System, and the Sierra Pacific Mental Illness, Research, Education, and Clinical Center (MIRECC), 3801 Miranda Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94304, USA.
Cristina TrevinoDepartment of Human Genetics, Emory University, Atlanta GA; revXon LLC.
David E CarlsonDepartment of Civil and Environmental Engineering and the Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University, Durham, NC 27708 USA.
Eric B DammerCenter for Neurodegenerative Disease, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA USA; Department of Neurology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA USA.
Erik C B JohnsonGoizueta Alzheimer's Disease Research Center, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA; Department of Neurology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Thomas S WingoDepartment of Neurology, University of California Davis, Davis CA 95816 USA.
Alex V KotlarDepartment of Human Genetics, Emory University, Atlanta GA; revXon LLC.

Funding

The Goizueta Alzheimer's Disease Research CenterP30AG066511 · NIA · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI ALLAN I LEVEY · 2020 to 2026
$29.0M
Closing the loop: development of real-time, personalized brain stimulationR01MH126639 · NIMH · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI KELLER, COREY J · 2021 to 2024
$1.6M
NIA NIH HHS P30 AG066511NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH126639
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Interest in detecting networks responsible for phenotypes spans multiple scientific disciplines, including proteomics and neuroscience. Latent variable models, such as Principal Component Analysis (PCA), are a natural choice for such networks, as they treat the observed measurements as outputs of a small number of unobserved processes. Unfortunately, they often fail to incorporate information relevant to the phenotypes of interest, especially when those phenotypes are noisy or have low variance. As a result, when the latent variables are used for prediction, as in principal component regression (PCR), they often perform substantially worse than traditional regression methods. Supervised variational autoencoders (SVAEs) attempt to remedy this by adding a predictive loss to the latent space. However, this supervision introduces a systematic discrepancy between the encoder distribution and the posterior distribution implied by the generative model. Left unaddressed, this mismatch can lead to misleading scientific conclusions and suboptimal intervention strategies when the model is used to guide experimental manipulations. To resolve these issues, we introduce generative principal component regression (gPCR), a novel objective for linear latent variable models that enforces consistency between encoder and posterior while preserving predictive accuracy. gPCR matches the performance of standard regression approaches while retaining the scientifically desirable network interpretation. Using synthetic data, we demonstrate that gPCR learns more realistic loadings and dramatically improves target selection compared to both PCR and SVAEs. We further validate gPCR's utility on two electrophysiology datasets, showing enhanced predictive power and better integration of phenotype-relevant signals into the learned loadings. Finally, in a proteomics study of an Alzheimer's disease cohort, we show that gPCR recovers biologically coherent networks that align more closely with prior experimental findings than traditional regression methods.

Indexed as

Dimensionality reductionGenomicsMaximum likelihood estimationNeurosciencePrincipal component analysisProteomics

Identifiers

PMID42222061
PMCPMC13220988

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.