2017 IEEE 7th International Workshop on Computational Advances in Multi-Sensor Adaptive Processing (CAMSAP) 2017
DOI: 10.1109/camsap.2017.8313129
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Correlation-Based ultrahigh-dimensional variable screening

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…7.2), [14], here we rely on a priori knowledge about the presence (or absence) of a few edges; conceivably leading to simpler algorithmic updates and better recovery performance. We may learn about edge status via limited questionnaires and experiments, or, we could perform edge screening prior to topology inference [15]; see also the discussion in Section 4. The batch PG algorithm developed in Section 2.1.3 to recover the network topology is computationally more efficient than existing methods for this (and related) problem(s).…”
Section: Technical Approach and Paper Outlinementioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…7.2), [14], here we rely on a priori knowledge about the presence (or absence) of a few edges; conceivably leading to simpler algorithmic updates and better recovery performance. We may learn about edge status via limited questionnaires and experiments, or, we could perform edge screening prior to topology inference [15]; see also the discussion in Section 4. The batch PG algorithm developed in Section 2.1.3 to recover the network topology is computationally more efficient than existing methods for this (and related) problem(s).…”
Section: Technical Approach and Paper Outlinementioning
confidence: 99%
“…7.3.4). Since (6) is a sparse linear regression problem, one could resort to so-termed variable screening techniques to drop edges prior to solving the optimization; see e.g., [15]. Either way, one ends up with extra constraints S ij = s ij , for a few vertex pairs (i, j) in the set Ω ⊂ N × N of observed edge weights s ij .…”
Section: Revisiting Stationarity For Graph Learningmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…7.2], [14], here we rely on a priori knowledge about the presence (or absence) of a few edges; conceivably leading to simpler algorithmic updates and better recovery performance. We may learn about edge status via limited questionnaires and experiments, or, we could perform edge screening prior to topology inference [15]. The batch PG algorithm developed in Section 2.3 to recover the network topology is computationally more efficient than existing methods for this (and related) problem(s).…”
Section: Technical Approach and Paper Outlinementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The key difference between the batch algorithm (11) and its online counterpart (15) is the variability of g t per iteration in the latter. Ideally, we would like Algorithm 2 to closely track the sequence of minimizers {S ⋆ t } for large enough t, something we corroborate numerically in Section 4.…”
Section: Convergence and Regret Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%