2015
DOI: 10.18409/jas.v6i2.38
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Markov degree of configurations defined by fibers of a configuration

Abstract: We consider a series of configurations defined by fibers of a given base configuration. We prove that Markov degree of the configurations is bounded from above by the Markov complexity of the base configuration. As important examples of base configurations we consider incidence matrices of graphs and study the maximum Markov degree of configurations defined by fibers of the incidence matrices. In particular we give a proof that the Markov degree for two-way transportation polytopes is three.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 16 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As shown by Diaconis & Sturmfels (1998), finding a Markov basis for a particular model is equivalent to finding generators for a specific ideal in a polynomial ring and can (in principle) be computed using Gröbner bases techniques. This spurred more research in algebraic statistics, see (Aoki et al, 2012;Drton et al, 2009;Hoṡten & Sullivant, 2007;Rapallo, 2003;Pistone & Rogantin, 2013) or more recently (Cai et al, 2014;Gross et al, 2016;Koyama et al, 2015;Rauh & Sullivant, 2016;Slavković et al, 2014). However, computing a Markov basis is often computationally intractable, making the Markov basis approach to goodness-of-fit testing ineffective in many applications.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As shown by Diaconis & Sturmfels (1998), finding a Markov basis for a particular model is equivalent to finding generators for a specific ideal in a polynomial ring and can (in principle) be computed using Gröbner bases techniques. This spurred more research in algebraic statistics, see (Aoki et al, 2012;Drton et al, 2009;Hoṡten & Sullivant, 2007;Rapallo, 2003;Pistone & Rogantin, 2013) or more recently (Cai et al, 2014;Gross et al, 2016;Koyama et al, 2015;Rauh & Sullivant, 2016;Slavković et al, 2014). However, computing a Markov basis is often computationally intractable, making the Markov basis approach to goodness-of-fit testing ineffective in many applications.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%