False Discovery Rate and Localizing Power
Authors:
Anderson M. Winkler,
Paul A. Taylor,
Thomas E. Nichols,
Chris Rorden
Abstract:
False discovery rate (FDR) is commonly used for correction for multiple testing in neuroimaging studies. However, when using two-tailed tests, making directional inferences about the results can lead to vastly inflated error rate, even approaching 100\% in some cases. This happens because FDR only provides weak control over the error rate, meaning that the proportion of error is guaranteed only gl…
▽ More
False discovery rate (FDR) is commonly used for correction for multiple testing in neuroimaging studies. However, when using two-tailed tests, making directional inferences about the results can lead to vastly inflated error rate, even approaching 100\% in some cases. This happens because FDR only provides weak control over the error rate, meaning that the proportion of error is guaranteed only globally over all tests, not within subsets, such as among those in only one or another direction. Here we consider and evaluate different strategies for FDR control with two-tailed tests, using both synthetic and real imaging data. Approaches that separate the tests by direction of the hypothesis test, or by the direction of the resulting test statistic, more properly control the directional error rate and preserve FDR benefits, albeit with a doubled risk of errors under complete absence of signal. Strategies that combine tests in both directions, or that use simple two-tailed p-values, can lead to invalid directional conclusions, even if these tests remain globally valid. To enable valid thresholding for directional inference, we suggest that imaging software should allow the possibility that the user sets asymmetrical thresholds for the two sides of the statistical map. While FDR continues to be a valid, powerful procedure for multiple testing correction, care is needed when making directional inferences for two-tailed tests, or more broadly, when making any localized inference.
△ Less
Submitted 7 January, 2024;
originally announced January 2024.
Permutation Inference for Canonical Correlation Analysis
Authors:
Anderson M. Winkler,
Olivier Renaud,
Stephen M. Smith,
Thomas E. Nichols
Abstract:
Canonical correlation analysis (CCA) has become a key tool for population neuroimaging, allowing investigation of associations between many imaging and non-imaging measurements. As other variables are often a source of variability not of direct interest, previous work has used CCA on residuals from a model that removes these effects, then proceeded directly to permutation inference. We show that s…
▽ More
Canonical correlation analysis (CCA) has become a key tool for population neuroimaging, allowing investigation of associations between many imaging and non-imaging measurements. As other variables are often a source of variability not of direct interest, previous work has used CCA on residuals from a model that removes these effects, then proceeded directly to permutation inference. We show that such a simple permutation test leads to inflated error rates. The reason is that residualisation introduces dependencies among the observations that violate the exchangeability assumption. Even in the absence of nuisance variables, however, a simple permutation test for CCA also leads to excess error rates for all canonical correlations other than the first. The reason is that a simple permutation scheme does not ignore the variability already explained by previous canonical variables. Here we propose solutions for both problems: in the case of nuisance variables, we show that transforming the residuals to a lower dimensional basis where exchangeability holds results in a valid permutation test; for more general cases, with or without nuisance variables, we propose estimating the canonical correlations in a stepwise manner, removing at each iteration the variance already explained, while dealing with different number of variables in both sides. We also discuss how to address the multiplicity of tests, proposing an admissible test that is not conservative, and provide a complete algorithm for permutation inference for CCA.
△ Less
Submitted 17 June, 2020; v1 submitted 23 February, 2020;
originally announced February 2020.
