Multiple two-sample testing under arbitrary covariance dependency with an application in imaging mass spectrometry

Vladimir Vutov; Thorsten Dickhaus

Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2108.08123

Multiple two-sample testing under arbitrary covariance dependency with an application in imaging mass spectrometry

Vladimir Vutov·Thorsten Dickhaus

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Large-scale hypothesis testing has become a ubiquitous problem in high-dimensional statistical inference, with broad applications in various scienfitic disciplines. One relevant application is constituted by imaging mass spectrometry (IMS) association studies, where a large number of tests are performed simultaneously in order to identify molecular masses that are associated with a particular phenotype, e. g., a cancer subtype. Mass spectra obtained from Matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization (MALDI) experiments are dependent, when considered as statistical quantities. False discovery proportion (FDP) control under arbitrary dependency structure among test statistics is an active topic in modern multiple testing research. In this context, we are concerned with the evaluation of associations between the binary outcome variable (describing the phenotype) and multiple predictors derived from MALDI measurements. We propose an inference procedure in which the correlation matrix of the test statistics is utilized. The approach is based on multiple marginal models (MMM). Specifically, we fit a marginal logistic regression model for each predictor individually. Asymptotic joint normality of the stacked vector of the marginal regression coefficients is established under standard regularity assumptions, and their (limiting) correlation matrix is estimated. The proposed method extracts common factors from the resulting empirical correlation matrix. Finally, we estimate the realized FDP of a thresholding procedure for the marginal $p$-values. We demonstrate a practical application of the proposed workflow to MALDI IMS data in an oncological context.

Explore related subjects

stat.ME

Keep this discovery

BibTeX RIS

Vladimir Vutov, Thorsten Dickhaus. 2021-08-18. Multiple two-sample testing under arbitrary covariance dependency with an application in imaging mass spectrometry. https://arxiv.org/abs/2108.08123

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↗