跳到正文
← 返回论文列表与筛选
阅读说明

本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。

DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。

引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。

关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。

分类依据与纠错

AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要聚焦基因组多响应回归的混杂调整与同时检验,未明确因果目标量,也未将潜在因子用于宏观或金融分析。

反馈分类问题

正在核对关联版本…

代码、数据与补充材料

正在核对对应版本的资源…

关注这篇论文的作者
Jin-Hong Du
Larry Wasserman
Kathryn Roeder

存在未测量混杂时广义线性模型的同时推断

研究问题
在多响应广义线性模型的大规模检验中,如何处理未测量混杂导致的系数偏差,并维持主要效应检验的错误控制?
方法与思路
作者结合正交结构与线性投影,先分离混杂效应,再以 lasso 型优化联合估计潜在因子和主要效应,最后进行加权去偏。
材料陈述的贡献
摘要称给出效应识别条件和非渐近误差界,并建立渐近 z 检验的第一类错误控制;数值实验展示 BH 程序的错误发现率表现。
阅读关注点
应核对潜在效应的识别条件、投影与正交结构的要求,以及渐近单项检验有效性和 BH 错误发现率控制的区别。
阅读边界
仅据版本未注明的 OpenAlex 索引摘要。任意混杂机制不等于无条件识别;具体假设未说明,BH 控制在摘要中属于数值证据。

原文摘要

Tens of thousands of simultaneous hypothesis tests are routinely performed in genomic studies to identify differentially expressed genes. However, due to unmeasured confounders, many standard statistical approaches may be substantially biased. This article investigates the large-scale hypothesis testing problem for multivariate generalized linear models in the presence of confounding effects. Under arbitrary confounding mechanisms, we propose a unified statistical estimation and inference framework that harnesses orthogonal structures and integrates linear projections into three key stages. It begins by disentangling marginal and uncorrelated confounding effects to recover the latent coefficients. Subsequently, latent factors and primary effects are jointly estimated through lasso-type optimization. Finally, we incorporate projected and weighted bias-correction steps for hypothesis testing. Theoretically, we establish the identification conditions of various effects and non-asymptotic error bounds. We show effective Type-I error control of asymptotic z-tests as sample and response sizes approach infinity. Numerical experiments demonstrate that the proposed method controls the false discovery rate by the Benjamini-Hochberg procedure and is more powerful than alternative methods. By comparing single-cell RNA-seq counts from two groups of samples, we demonstrate the suitability of adjusting confounding effects when significant covariates are absent from the model. Supplementary materials for this article are available online, including a standardized description of the materials available for reproducing the work.

笔记与分组