J. Suckling

Juan M Gorriz, R. Martin Clemente, F Segovia et al.

As a technique that can compactly represent complex patterns, machine learning has significant potential for predictive inference. K-fold cross-validation (CV) is the most common approach to ascertaining the likelihood that a machine learning outcome is generated by chance, and it frequently outperforms conventional hypothesis testing. This improvement uses measures directly obtained from machine learning classifications, such as accuracy, that do not have a parametric description. To approach a frequentist analysis within machine learning pipelines, a permutation test or simple statistics from data partitions (i.e., folds) can be added to estimate confidence intervals. Unfortunately, neither parametric nor non-parametric tests solve the inherent problems of partitioning small sample-size datasets and learning from heterogeneous data sources. The fact that machine learning strongly depends on the learning parameters and the distribution of data across folds recapitulates familiar difficulties around excess false positives and replication. A novel statistical test based on K-fold CV and the Upper Bound of the actual risk (K-fold CUBV) is proposed, where uncertain predictions of machine learning with CV are bounded by the worst case through the evaluation of concentration inequalities. Probably Approximately Correct-Bayesian upper bounds for linear classifiers in combination with K-fold CV are derived and used to estimate the actual risk. The performance with simulated and neuroimaging datasets suggests that K-fold CUBV is a robust criterion for detecting effects and validating accuracy values obtained from machine learning and classical CV schemes, while avoiding excess false positives.

Juan M Gorriz, J. Ramirez, F. Segovia et al.

Regression analysis is a central topic in statistical modeling, aimed at estimating the relationships between a dependent variable, commonly referred to as the response variable, and one or more independent variables, i.e., explanatory variables. Linear regression is by far the most popular method for performing this task in various fields of research, such as data integration and predictive modeling when combining information from multiple sources. Classical methods for solving linear regression problems, such as Ordinary Least Squares (OLS), Ridge, or Lasso regressions, often form the foundation for more advanced machine learning (ML) techniques, which have been successfully applied, though without a formal definition of statistical significance. At most, permutation or analyses based on empirical measures (e.g., residuals or accuracy) have been conducted, leveraging the greater sensitivity of ML estimations for detection. In this paper, we introduce Statistical Agnostic Regression (SAR) for evaluating the statistical significance of ML-based linear regression models. This is achieved by analyzing concentration inequalities of the actual risk (expected loss) and considering the worst-case scenario. To this end, we define a threshold that ensures there is sufficient evidence, with a probability of at least $1-η$, to conclude the existence of a linear relationship in the population between the explanatory (feature) and the response (label) variables. Simulations demonstrate the ability of the proposed agnostic (non-parametric) test to provide an analysis of variance similar to the classical multivariate $F$-test for the slope parameter, without relying on the underlying assumptions of classical methods. Moreover, the residuals computed from this method represent a trade-off between those obtained from ML approaches and the classical OLS.

JM Gorriz, R. Martin-Clemente, C. G. Puntonet et al.

There remains an open question about the usefulness and the interpretation of Machine learning (MLE) approaches for discrimination of spatial patterns of brain images between samples or activation states. In the last few decades, these approaches have limited their operation to feature extraction and linear classification tasks for between-group inference. In this context, statistical inference is assessed by randomly permuting image labels or by the use of random effect models that consider between-subject variability. These multivariate MLE-based statistical pipelines, whilst potentially more effective for detecting activations than hypotheses-driven methods, have lost their mathematical elegance, ease of interpretation, and spatial localization of the ubiquitous General linear Model (GLM). Recently, the estimation of the conventional GLM has been demonstrated to be connected to an univariate classification task when the design matrix is expressed as a binary indicator matrix. In this paper we explore the complete connection between the univariate GLM and MLE \emph{regressions}. To this purpose we derive a refined statistical test with the GLM based on the parameters obtained by a linear Support Vector Regression (SVR) in the \emph{inverse} problem (SVR-iGLM). Subsequently, random field theory (RFT) is employed for assessing statistical significance following a conventional GLM benchmark. Experimental results demonstrate how parameter estimations derived from each model (mainly GLM and SVR) result in different experimental design estimates that are significantly related to the predefined functional task. Moreover, using real data from a multisite initiative the proposed MLE-based inference demonstrates statistical power and the control of false positives, outperforming the regular GLM.