Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2205.07253

Evaluating Independence and Conditional Independence Measures

Abstract

Independence and Conditional Independence (CI) are two fundamental concepts in probability and statistics, which can be applied to solve many central problems of statistical inference. There are many existing independence and CI measures defined from diverse principles and concepts. In this paper, the 16 independence measures and 16 CI measures were reviewed and then evaluated with simulated and real data. For the independence measures, eight simulated data were generating from normal distribution, normal and Archimedean copula functions to compare the measures in bivariate or multivariate, linear or nonlinear settings. Two UCI dataset, including the heart disease data and the wine quality data, were used to test the power of the independence measures in real conditions. For the CI measures, two simulated data with normal distribution and Gumbel copula, and one real data (the Beijing air data) were utilized to test the CI measures in prespecified linear or nonlinear setting and real scenario. From the experimental results, we found that most of the measures work well on the simulated data by presenting the right monotonicity of the simulations. However, the independence and CI measures were differentiated on much complex real data respectively and only a few can be considered as working well with reference to domain knowledge. We also found that the measures tend to be separated into groups based on the similarity of the behaviors of them in each setting and in general. According to the experiments, we recommend CE as a good choice for both independence and CI measure. This is also due to its rigorous distribution-free definition and consistent nonparametric estimator.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Jian Ma. 2022-05-15. Evaluating Independence and Conditional Independence Measures. https://arxiv.org/abs/2205.07253

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Bias-Correction for Privacy-Protected Spatial Autoregressive Models with Application to Restaurant Network Analysis

Spatial autoregressive (SAR) models and their extensions are important tools for studying network effects. However, with an increasing emphasis on data privacy, data providers often implement protection measures that render standard SAR models inapplicable. In this study, we introduce a privacy-protected SAR model that incorporates noise into both the response and covariates to meet privacy requirements. With noise present in both components, the traditional quasi-maximum likelihood estimator becomes difficult to compute because the likelihood function cannot be directly formulated. To bypass this hurdle, we begin with a pseudo-likelihood approach, initially omitting the noise in the covariates. A Newton-Raphson algorithm is then applied to compute the estimator; however, the estimator is biased. To address this, we propose a bias-corrected Newton-Raphson-type algorithm that simultaneously accounts for noise in both the response and covariates. We further show, under appropriate regularity conditions, that the resulting estimator is consistent and asymptotically normal. To further enhance computational efficiency, we also develop a bias-corrected least squares estimator. Several extensions are discussed, and the finite-sample performance of the proposed methods is evaluated through extensive simulations. We apply the proposed methodology to restaurant transaction data from a third-party payment platform. Our method identifies a statistically significant competitive network effect among restaurants and further reveals meaningful restaurant-customer interaction patterns.

stat.ME

A variational framework for modal estimation

Multivariate mode estimation arises in many statistical problems such as inverse problems, multimodal sampling, and density-based clustering, but becomes challenging in moderate to high dimensions, especially when the underlying density is not directly evaluable. We introduce GERVE (Gibbs-measure Entropy-Regularized Variational Estimation), a sample-based method for estimating multivariate modes by approximating Gibbs distributions directly from samples, without estimating or evaluating the density. GERVE uses Gaussian-mixture variational annealing and natural-gradient optimization, producing a mixture concentrated in high-density regions whose component responsibilities also provide a clustering of the observations. We prove theoretical guarantees in two regimes: as the Gibbs temperature goes to zero, the optimal variational mixture concentrates around the global modes of the population density; at fixed positive temperature, we prove existence, consistency, and asymptotic normality of empirical maximizers and propose a bootstrap procedure for uncertainty quantification. Simulations and a real-data experiment show that GERVE accurately recovers modes and produces meaningful clusters.

stat.ME

Objective Model Prior Probabilities in Variable Selection

For many years it was routine to use equal model prior probabilities in Bayesian model uncertainty analysis. At least twenty years ago it became clear that this was problematic, leading to support of much too large models in the increasingly huge model spaces being considered in genomics and other fields. A popular replacement was to adopt a suggestion of Harold Jeffreys for the variable selection problem in which a total of $k$ possible variables are being considered for inclusion in the model: give the collection of all models containing $d$ variables ($d = 0, . . . , k$) prior probability $1/(k + 1)$ and then divide this prior probability equally among the models in the collection. Many other choices of model prior probabilities that impose severe parsimony have also been introduced. We begin by reviewing the problems with using equal model prior probabilities and then discuss some serious problems with the Jeffreys choice. Finally, we introduce and study a number of objective alternative choices of model prior probabilities, from both numerical and theoretical perspectives.

stat.ME