Data segmentation algorithms: Univariate mean change and beyond

Haeran Cho; Claudia Kirch

Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2012.12814

Data segmentation algorithms: Univariate mean change and beyond

Haeran Cho·Claudia Kirch

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Data segmentation a.k.a. multiple change point analysis has received considerable attention due to its importance in time series analysis and signal processing, with applications in a variety of fields including natural and social sciences, medicine, engineering and finance. In the first part of this survey, we review the existing literature on the canonical data segmentation problem which aims at detecting and localising multiple change points in the mean of univariate time series. We provide an overview of popular methodologies on their computational complexity and theoretical properties. In particular, our theoretical discussion focuses on the separation rate relating to which change points are detectable by a given procedure, and the localisation rate quantifying the precision of corresponding change point estimators, and we distinguish between whether a homogeneous or multiscale viewpoint has been adopted in their derivation. We further highlight that the latter viewpoint provides the most general setting for investigating the optimality of data segmentation algorithms. Arguably, the canonical segmentation problem has been the most popular framework to propose new data segmentation algorithms and study their efficiency in the last decades. In the second part of this survey, we motivate the importance of attaining an in-depth understanding of strengths and weaknesses of methodologies for the change point problem in a simpler, univariate setting, as a stepping stone for the development of methodologies for more complex problems. We illustrate this with a range of examples showcasing the connections between complex distributional changes and those in the mean. We also discuss extensions towards high-dimensional change point problems where we demonstrate that the challenges arising from high dimensionality are orthogonal to those in dealing with multiple change points.

Explore related subjects

stat.ME

Keep this discovery

BibTeX RIS

Haeran Cho, Claudia Kirch. 2020-12-23. Data segmentation algorithms: Univariate mean change and beyond. https://arxiv.org/abs/2012.12814

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Surprise Reduction and Nullification in Bayesian and Inverse Bayesian Inference under Ambiguous Prediction-Error Attribution

In non-stationary environments, prediction errors may signal environmental change or transient outliers, and adaptive systems must track such changes without overreacting to outliers. We distinguish surprise reduction, which updates beliefs to fit observations, from surprise nullification, which weakens constraints imposed by the predictive structure, and formalize both within Bayesian and inverse Bayesian (BIB) inference. Belief and likelihood updates are derived from variational objectives sharing a nullification strength, determined endogenously by minimizing surprise under the candidate post-update predictive distribution. In the Gaussian case, nullification expands belief and likelihood variances by a common factor relative to standard Bayesian updating, leaving the ratio unchanged. BIB thus defers attribution of the prediction error, committing to neither latent-state change nor observation-process uncertainty. The nullification strength is carried over as a candidate and is maintained or released according to the predictive surprise of the next observation. In a mean estimation task with outliers and changepoints, no scanned parameter setting of a Sage-Husa-type adaptive Kalman filter, fixed-strength BIB variant, or belief-forgetting-only variant outperforms BIB in both changepoint tracking and post-outlier stability. An oracle-informed reduced Bayesian model tracks changepoints better but is less stable after outliers. Although BIB maintains no explicit hypotheses about changepoints or outliers, it generates event-dependent dynamics. The learning rate increases after changepoints, whereas after outliers, nullification is released, and this increase is suppressed. Deferring attribution and letting subsequent observations differentiate the responses may constitute a principle of adaptive inference in non-stationary environments.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2026

Generalized Ridge Refitting for the Lasso and Prediction Improvement Bounds

We study a class of Lasso based estimators obtained by applying a quadratic correction on the Lasso equicorrelation set. The penalty matrix determines both the magnitude and geometry of the correction and contains, among other cases, the isotropic Lasso--Ridge correction, least squares refitting, Gram proportional interpolation between the Lasso and least squares, and coordinate specific penalties. We first derive a closed form representation and isolate the positive gain component of the resulting prediction improvement. We then control the remaining stochastic linear term in expectation by localizing the random signed equicorrelation model around a deterministic reference support. This yields a finite sample expectation bound that explicitly accounts for the randomness induced by Lasso model selection. The resulting decomposition provides a unified framework for understanding when Lasso based quadratic corrections can improve prediction.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2026

Discretization in covariate-adaptive randomization: gains and losses

Covariate-adaptive randomization(CAR) is widely implemented in clinical trials to balance prognostic covariates across treatment arms. Continuous covariates are often discretized into strata in practice, yet their consequences are not clearly understood. This paper provides a comprehensive study of the impact of discretization on both the CAR design process and the inferential results thereafter. We establish the asymptotic properties of both imbalance measures and treatment effect estimators under discretized and non-discretized settings. Practical recommendations are given on when and how discretization should be employed. We show that discretization in design is generally recommended, as it enhances robustness against model misspecification. However, if the true model is known, the most efficient strategy is to balance covariates according to that model in the design. The theoretical results are corroborated by extensive simulation studies and an empirical application to a diabetes trial dataset. Together, the results clarify the gains and losses of discretization in CAR and pave the way for learning impact of discretization to other designs and beyond.

stat.ME↗