Minimum-entropy causal inference and its application in brain network analysis

Lipeng Ning

Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2209.03329

Minimum-entropy causal inference and its application in brain network analysis

Lipeng Ning

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Identification of the causal relationship between multivariate time series is a ubiquitous problem in data science. Granger causality measure (GCM) and conditional Granger causality measure (cGCM) are widely used statistical methods for causal inference and effective connectivity analysis in neuroimaging research. Both GCM and cGCM have frequency-domain formulations that are developed based on a heuristic algorithm for matrix decompositions. The goal of this work is to generalize GCM and cGCM measures and their frequency-domain formulations by using a theoretic framework for minimum entropy (ME) estimation. The proposed ME-estimation method extends the classical theory of minimum mean squared error (MMSE) estimation for stochastic processes. It provides three formulations of cGCM that include Geweke's original time-domain cGCM as a special case. But all three frequency-domain formulations of cGCM are different from previous methods. Experimental results based on simulations have shown that one of the proposed frequency-domain cGCM has enhanced sensitivity and specificity in detecting network connections compared to other methods. In an example based on in vivo functional magnetic resonance imaging, the proposed frequency-domain measure cGCM can significantly enhance the consistency between the structural and effective connectivity of human brain networks.

Explore related subjects

stat.ME cs.IT cs.SY eess.SY math.IT

Keep this discovery

BibTeX RIS

Lipeng Ning. 2022-09-07. Minimum-entropy causal inference and its application in brain network analysis. https://arxiv.org/abs/2209.03329

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↗