Statistics: Difference between revisions

From 太極
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
== Statisticians ==
= Statisticians =
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Pearson Karl Pearson] (1857-1936): chi-square, p-value, PCA
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Pearson Karl Pearson] (1857-1936): chi-square, p-value, PCA
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Sealy_Gosset William Sealy Gosset] (1876-1937): Student's t
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Sealy_Gosset William Sealy Gosset] (1876-1937): Student's t
Line 6: Line 6:
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerzy_Neyman Jerzy Neyman] (1894-1981): type 1 error
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerzy_Neyman Jerzy Neyman] (1894-1981): type 1 error


== Statistics for biologists ==
= Statistics for biologists =
http://www.nature.com/collections/qghhqm
http://www.nature.com/collections/qghhqm


== Transform sample values to their percentiles ==
= Transform sample values to their percentiles =
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/21219447/calculating-percentile-of-dataset-column
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/21219447/calculating-percentile-of-dataset-column
<syntaxhighlight lang='bash'>
<syntaxhighlight lang='bash'>
Line 24: Line 24:
</syntaxhighlight>
</syntaxhighlight>


== Box(Box and whisker) plot in R ==
= Box(Box and whisker) plot in R =
See  
See  
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Box_plot
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Box_plot
Line 64: Line 64:
Note the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Box_plot wikipedia] lists several possible definitions of a whisker. R uses the 2nd method (Tukey boxplot) to define whiskers.
Note the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Box_plot wikipedia] lists several possible definitions of a whisker. R uses the 2nd method (Tukey boxplot) to define whiskers.


=== Create boxplots from a list object ===
== Create boxplots from a list object ==
Normally we use a vector to create a single boxplot or a formula on a data to create boxplots.  
Normally we use a vector to create a single boxplot or a formula on a data to create boxplots.  


But we can also use [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/base/versions/3.5.1/topics/split split()] to create a list and then make boxplots.
But we can also use [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/base/versions/3.5.1/topics/split split()] to create a list and then make boxplots.


=== Dot-box plot ===
== Dot-box plot ==
* http://civilstat.com/2012/09/the-grammar-of-graphics-notes-on-first-reading/
* http://civilstat.com/2012/09/the-grammar-of-graphics-notes-on-first-reading/
* http://www.r-graph-gallery.com/89-box-and-scatter-plot-with-ggplot2/
* http://www.r-graph-gallery.com/89-box-and-scatter-plot-with-ggplot2/
Line 83: Line 83:
[[File:Boxdot.svg|300px]]
[[File:Boxdot.svg|300px]]


=== Other boxplots ===
== Other boxplots ==


[[File:Lotsboxplot.png|250px]]
[[File:Lotsboxplot.png|250px]]


== stem and leaf plot ==
= stem and leaf plot =
[https://stat.ethz.ch/R-manual/R-devel/library/graphics/html/stem.html stem()]. See [http://www.r-tutor.com/elementary-statistics/quantitative-data/stem-and-leaf-plot R Tutorial].
[https://stat.ethz.ch/R-manual/R-devel/library/graphics/html/stem.html stem()]. See [http://www.r-tutor.com/elementary-statistics/quantitative-data/stem-and-leaf-plot R Tutorial].


Line 145: Line 145:
</syntaxhighlight>
</syntaxhighlight>


== Box-Cox transformation ==
= Box-Cox transformation =
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_transform#Box%E2%80%93Cox_transformation Power transformation]
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_transform#Box%E2%80%93Cox_transformation Power transformation]
* [http://denishaine.wordpress.com/2013/03/11/veterinary-epidemiologic-research-linear-regression-part-3-box-cox-and-matrix-representation/ Finding transformation for normal distribution]
* [http://denishaine.wordpress.com/2013/03/11/veterinary-epidemiologic-research-linear-regression-part-3-box-cox-and-matrix-representation/ Finding transformation for normal distribution]


== the Holy Trinity (LRT, Wald, Score tests) ==  
= the Holy Trinity (LRT, Wald, Score tests) =  
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Likelihood_function which includes '''profile likelihood''' and '''partial likelihood'''
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Likelihood_function which includes '''profile likelihood''' and '''partial likelihood'''
* [http://data.princeton.edu/wws509/notes/a1.pdf Review of the likelihood theory]
* [http://data.princeton.edu/wws509/notes/a1.pdf Review of the likelihood theory]
Line 160: Line 160:
** lmtest package, [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/lmtest/versions/0.9-37/topics/waldtest waldtest()] and [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/lmtest/versions/0.9-37/topics/lrtest lrtest()].
** lmtest package, [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/lmtest/versions/0.9-37/topics/waldtest waldtest()] and [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/lmtest/versions/0.9-37/topics/lrtest lrtest()].


== Don't invert that matrix  ==
= Don't invert that matrix  =
* http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2010/01/19/dont-invert-that-matrix/
* http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2010/01/19/dont-invert-that-matrix/
* http://civilstat.com/2015/07/dont-invert-that-matrix-why-and-how/
* http://civilstat.com/2015/07/dont-invert-that-matrix-why-and-how/


=== Different matrix decompositions/factorizations ===
== Different matrix decompositions/factorizations ==


* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QR_decomposition QR decomposition], [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/base/versions/3.5.1/topics/qr qr()]  
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QR_decomposition QR decomposition], [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/base/versions/3.5.1/topics/qr qr()]  
Line 196: Line 196:
</syntaxhighlight>
</syntaxhighlight>


== Linear Regression ==
= Linear Regression =
[https://leanpub.com/regmods Regression Models for Data Science in R] by Brian Caffo
[https://leanpub.com/regmods Regression Models for Data Science in R] by Brian Caffo


Comic https://xkcd.com/1725/
Comic https://xkcd.com/1725/


=== Different models (in R) ===
== Different models (in R) ==
http://www.quantide.com/raccoon-ch-1-introduction-to-linear-models-with-r/
http://www.quantide.com/raccoon-ch-1-introduction-to-linear-models-with-r/


=== dummy.coef.lm() in R ===
== dummy.coef.lm() in R ==
Extracts coefficients in terms of the original levels of the coefficients rather than the coded variables.
Extracts coefficients in terms of the original levels of the coefficients rather than the coded variables.


=== Contrasts in linear regression ===
== Contrasts in linear regression ==
* Page 147 of Modern Applied Statistics with S (4th ed)
* Page 147 of Modern Applied Statistics with S (4th ed)
* https://biologyforfun.wordpress.com/2015/01/13/using-and-interpreting-different-contrasts-in-linear-models-in-r/ This explains the meanings of 'treatment', 'helmert' and 'sum' contrasts.
* https://biologyforfun.wordpress.com/2015/01/13/using-and-interpreting-different-contrasts-in-linear-models-in-r/ This explains the meanings of 'treatment', 'helmert' and 'sum' contrasts.
Line 255: Line 255:
</syntaxhighlight>
</syntaxhighlight>


=== Multicollinearity ===
== Multicollinearity ==
* [https://datascienceplus.com/multicollinearity-in-r/ Multicollinearity in R]
* [https://datascienceplus.com/multicollinearity-in-r/ Multicollinearity in R]
* [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/stats/versions/3.5.1/topics/alias alias]: Find Aliases (Dependencies) In A Model
* [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/stats/versions/3.5.1/topics/alias alias]: Find Aliases (Dependencies) In A Model
Line 272: Line 272:
</syntaxhighlight>
</syntaxhighlight>


=== Exposure ===
== Exposure ==
https://en.mimi.hu/mathematics/exposure_variable.html
https://en.mimi.hu/mathematics/exposure_variable.html


Independent variable = predictor = explanatory = exposure variable
Independent variable = predictor = explanatory = exposure variable


=== Confounders, confounding ===
== Confounders, confounding ==
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confounding
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confounding
** [https://academic.oup.com/jamia/article/21/2/308/723853 A method for controlling complex confounding effects in the detection of adverse drug reactions using electronic health records]. It provides a rule to identify a confounder.
** [https://academic.oup.com/jamia/article/21/2/308/723853 A method for controlling complex confounding effects in the detection of adverse drug reactions using electronic health records]. It provides a rule to identify a confounder.
Line 287: Line 287:
* [https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-019-1700-9 Addressing confounding artifacts in reconstruction of gene co-expression networks] Parsana 2019
* [https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-019-1700-9 Addressing confounding artifacts in reconstruction of gene co-expression networks] Parsana 2019


=== Confidence interval vs prediction interval ===
== Confidence interval vs prediction interval ==
Confidence intervals tell you about how well you have determined the mean E(Y). Prediction intervals tell you where you can expect to see the next data point sampled. That is, CI is computed using Var(E(Y|X)) and PI is computed using Var(E(Y|X) + e).
Confidence intervals tell you about how well you have determined the mean E(Y). Prediction intervals tell you where you can expect to see the next data point sampled. That is, CI is computed using Var(E(Y|X)) and PI is computed using Var(E(Y|X) + e).


Line 296: Line 296:
* https://datascienceplus.com/prediction-interval-the-wider-sister-of-confidence-interval/
* https://datascienceplus.com/prediction-interval-the-wider-sister-of-confidence-interval/


=== Heteroskedasticity ===
== Heteroskedasticity ==
[http://www.brodrigues.co/blog/2018-07-08-rob_stderr/ Dealing with heteroskedasticity; regression with robust standard errors using R]
[http://www.brodrigues.co/blog/2018-07-08-rob_stderr/ Dealing with heteroskedasticity; regression with robust standard errors using R]


=== Linear regression with Map Reduce ===
== Linear regression with Map Reduce ==
https://freakonometrics.hypotheses.org/53269
https://freakonometrics.hypotheses.org/53269


== Non- and semi-parametric regression ==
= Non- and semi-parametric regression =
* [https://mathewanalytics.com/2018/03/05/semiparametric-regression-in-r/ Semiparametric Regression in R]
* [https://mathewanalytics.com/2018/03/05/semiparametric-regression-in-r/ Semiparametric Regression in R]
* https://socialsciences.mcmaster.ca/jfox/Courses/Oxford-2005/R-nonparametric-regression.html
* https://socialsciences.mcmaster.ca/jfox/Courses/Oxford-2005/R-nonparametric-regression.html


=== Splines ===
== Splines ==
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-spline
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-spline
* [https://www.r-bloggers.com/cubic-and-smoothing-splines-in-r/ Cubic and Smoothing Splines in R]. '''bs()''' is for cubic spline and '''smooth.spline()''' is for smoothing spline.
* [https://www.r-bloggers.com/cubic-and-smoothing-splines-in-r/ Cubic and Smoothing Splines in R]. '''bs()''' is for cubic spline and '''smooth.spline()''' is for smoothing spline.
Line 313: Line 313:
* https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/cobs/versions/1.3-3/topics/cobs
* https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/cobs/versions/1.3-3/topics/cobs


=== k-Nearest neighbor regression ===
== k-Nearest neighbor regression ==
* k-NN regression in practice: boundary problem, discontinuities problem.
* k-NN regression in practice: boundary problem, discontinuities problem.
* Weighted k-NN regression: want weight to be small when distance is large. Common choices - weight = kernel(xi, x)
* Weighted k-NN regression: want weight to be small when distance is large. Common choices - weight = kernel(xi, x)


=== Kernel regression ===
== Kernel regression ==
* Instead of weighting NN, weight ALL points. Nadaraya-Watson kernel weighted average:
* Instead of weighting NN, weight ALL points. Nadaraya-Watson kernel weighted average:
<math>\hat{y}_q = \sum c_{qi} y_i/\sum c_{qi} = \frac{\sum \text{Kernel}_\lambda(\text{distance}(x_i, x_q))*y_i}{\sum \text{Kernel}_\lambda(\text{distance}(x_i, x_q))} </math>.
<math>\hat{y}_q = \sum c_{qi} y_i/\sum c_{qi} = \frac{\sum \text{Kernel}_\lambda(\text{distance}(x_i, x_q))*y_i}{\sum \text{Kernel}_\lambda(\text{distance}(x_i, x_q))} </math>.
Line 324: Line 324:
* Issues with high dimensions, data scarcity and computational complexity.
* Issues with high dimensions, data scarcity and computational complexity.


== Principal component analysis ==
= Principal component analysis =
=== R source code ===
== R source code ==
<pre>
<pre>
> stats:::prcomp.default
> stats:::prcomp.default
Line 358: Line 358:
</pre>
</pre>


=== R example ===
== R example ==
http://genomicsclass.github.io/book/pages/pca_svd.html
http://genomicsclass.github.io/book/pages/pca_svd.html
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
Line 376: Line 376:
# gray
# gray


=== PCA and SVD ===
== PCA and SVD ==
Using the SVD to perform PCA makes much better sense numerically than forming the covariance matrix to begin with, since the formation of <math>X X^T</math> can cause loss of precision.
Using the SVD to perform PCA makes much better sense numerically than forming the covariance matrix to begin with, since the formation of <math>X X^T</math> can cause loss of precision.


http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/3869/what-is-the-intuitive-relationship-between-svd-and-pca
http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/3869/what-is-the-intuitive-relationship-between-svd-and-pca


==== AIC/BIC in estimating the number of components ====
=== AIC/BIC in estimating the number of components ===
[https://projecteuclid.org/euclid.aos/1525313075 Consistency of AIC and BIC in estimating the number of significant components in high-dimensional principal component analysis]
[https://projecteuclid.org/euclid.aos/1525313075 Consistency of AIC and BIC in estimating the number of significant components in high-dimensional principal component analysis]


=== Related to Factor Analysis ===
== Related to Factor Analysis ==
* http://www.aaronschlegel.com/factor-analysis-introduction-principal-component-method-r/.  
* http://www.aaronschlegel.com/factor-analysis-introduction-principal-component-method-r/.  
* http://support.minitab.com/en-us/minitab/17/topic-library/modeling-statistics/multivariate/principal-components-and-factor-analysis/differences-between-pca-and-factor-analysis/
* http://support.minitab.com/en-us/minitab/17/topic-library/modeling-statistics/multivariate/principal-components-and-factor-analysis/differences-between-pca-and-factor-analysis/
Line 393: Line 393:
# Use Principal Components Analysis to reduce the data into a smaller number of components. Use Factor Analysis to understand what constructs underlie the data.
# Use Principal Components Analysis to reduce the data into a smaller number of components. Use Factor Analysis to understand what constructs underlie the data.


=== Calculated by Hand ===
== Calculated by Hand ==
http://strata.uga.edu/software/pdf/pcaTutorial.pdf
http://strata.uga.edu/software/pdf/pcaTutorial.pdf


=== Do not scale your matrix ===
== Do not scale your matrix ==
https://privefl.github.io/blog/(Linear-Algebra)-Do-not-scale-your-matrix/
https://privefl.github.io/blog/(Linear-Algebra)-Do-not-scale-your-matrix/


=== Visualization ===
== Visualization ==
* [http://oracledmt.blogspot.com/2007/06/way-cooler-pca-and-visualization-linear.html PCA and Visualization]
* [http://oracledmt.blogspot.com/2007/06/way-cooler-pca-and-visualization-linear.html PCA and Visualization]
* Scree plots from the [http://www.sthda.com/english/wiki/factominer-and-factoextra-principal-component-analysis-visualization-r-software-and-data-mining FactoMineR] package (based on ggplot2)
* Scree plots from the [http://www.sthda.com/english/wiki/factominer-and-factoextra-principal-component-analysis-visualization-r-software-and-data-mining FactoMineR] package (based on ggplot2)


=== What does it do if we choose center=FALSE in prcomp()? ===
== What does it do if we choose center=FALSE in prcomp()? ==


In USArrests data, use center=FALSE gives a better scatter plot of the first 2 PCA components.
In USArrests data, use center=FALSE gives a better scatter plot of the first 2 PCA components.
Line 413: Line 413:
</pre>
</pre>


=== Relation to [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multidimensional_scaling Multidimensional scaling/MDS] ===
== Relation to [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multidimensional_scaling Multidimensional scaling/MDS] ==
With no missing data, classical MDS (Euclidean distance metric) is the same as PCA.  
With no missing data, classical MDS (Euclidean distance metric) is the same as PCA.  


Line 424: Line 424:
[https://stat.ethz.ch/R-manual/R-devel/library/stats/html/cmdscale.html cmdscale] (Metric)
[https://stat.ethz.ch/R-manual/R-devel/library/stats/html/cmdscale.html cmdscale] (Metric)


=== Matrix factorization methods ===
== Matrix factorization methods ==
http://joelcadwell.blogspot.com/2015/08/matrix-factorization-comes-in-many.html Review of principal component analysis (PCA), K-means clustering, nonnegative matrix factorization (NMF) and archetypal analysis (AA).
http://joelcadwell.blogspot.com/2015/08/matrix-factorization-comes-in-many.html Review of principal component analysis (PCA), K-means clustering, nonnegative matrix factorization (NMF) and archetypal analysis (AA).


=== Number of components ===
== Number of components ==
[https://statisticaloddsandends.wordpress.com/2018/10/15/obtaining-the-number-of-components-from-cross-validation-of-principal-components-regression/ Obtaining the number of components from cross validation of principal components regression]
[https://statisticaloddsandends.wordpress.com/2018/10/15/obtaining-the-number-of-components-from-cross-validation-of-principal-components-regression/ Obtaining the number of components from cross validation of principal components regression]


== Partial Least Squares (PLS) ==
= Partial Least Squares (PLS) =
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partial_least_squares_regression. The general underlying model of multivariate PLS is
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partial_least_squares_regression. The general underlying model of multivariate PLS is
:<math>X = T P^\mathrm{T} + E</math>
:<math>X = T P^\mathrm{T} + E</math>
Line 441: Line 441:
[https://web.stanford.edu/~hastie/ElemStatLearn//printings/ESLII_print12.pdf#page=101 PLS, PCR (principal components regression) and ridge regression tend to behave similarly]. Ridge regression may be preferred because it shrinks smoothly, rather than in discrete steps.
[https://web.stanford.edu/~hastie/ElemStatLearn//printings/ESLII_print12.pdf#page=101 PLS, PCR (principal components regression) and ridge regression tend to behave similarly]. Ridge regression may be preferred because it shrinks smoothly, rather than in discrete steps.


== High dimension ==
= High dimension =
[https://projecteuclid.org/euclid.aos/1547197242 Partial least squares prediction in high-dimensional regression] Cook and Forzani, 2019
[https://projecteuclid.org/euclid.aos/1547197242 Partial least squares prediction in high-dimensional regression] Cook and Forzani, 2019


== [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_component_analysis Independent component analysis] ==
= [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_component_analysis Independent component analysis] =
ICA is another dimensionality reduction method.  
ICA is another dimensionality reduction method.  


=== ICA vs PCA ===
== ICA vs PCA ==


=== ICS vs FA ===
== ICS vs FA ==


== [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correspondence_analysis Correspondence analysis] ==
= [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correspondence_analysis Correspondence analysis] =
https://francoishusson.wordpress.com/2017/07/18/multiple-correspondence-analysis-with-factominer/ and the book [https://www.crcpress.com/Exploratory-Multivariate-Analysis-by-Example-Using-R-Second-Edition/Husson-Le-Pages/p/book/9781138196346?tab=rev Exploratory Multivariate Analysis by Example Using R]
https://francoishusson.wordpress.com/2017/07/18/multiple-correspondence-analysis-with-factominer/ and the book [https://www.crcpress.com/Exploratory-Multivariate-Analysis-by-Example-Using-R-Second-Edition/Husson-Le-Pages/p/book/9781138196346?tab=rev Exploratory Multivariate Analysis by Example Using R]


== t-SNE ==
= t-SNE =
t-Distributed Stochastic Neighbor Embedding (t-SNE) is a technique for dimensionality reduction that is particularly well suited for the visualization of high-dimensional datasets.  
t-Distributed Stochastic Neighbor Embedding (t-SNE) is a technique for dimensionality reduction that is particularly well suited for the visualization of high-dimensional datasets.  


Line 464: Line 464:
* [https://intobioinformatics.wordpress.com/2019/05/30/quick-and-easy-t-sne-analysis-in-r/ Quick and easy t-SNE analysis in R]
* [https://intobioinformatics.wordpress.com/2019/05/30/quick-and-easy-t-sne-analysis-in-r/ Quick and easy t-SNE analysis in R]


== Visualize the random effects ==
= Visualize the random effects =
http://www.quantumforest.com/2012/11/more-sense-of-random-effects/
http://www.quantumforest.com/2012/11/more-sense-of-random-effects/


== [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calibration_(statistics) Calibration] ==
= [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calibration_(statistics) Calibration] =
* [https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/43053/how-to-determine-calibration-accuracy-uncertainty-of-a-linear-regression How to determine calibration accuracy/uncertainty of a linear regression?]
* [https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/43053/how-to-determine-calibration-accuracy-uncertainty-of-a-linear-regression How to determine calibration accuracy/uncertainty of a linear regression?]
* [https://chem.libretexts.org/Textbook_Maps/Analytical_Chemistry/Book%3A_Analytical_Chemistry_2.0_(Harvey)/05_Standardizing_Analytical_Methods/5.4%3A_Linear_Regression_and_Calibration_Curves Linear Regression and Calibration Curves]
* [https://chem.libretexts.org/Textbook_Maps/Analytical_Chemistry/Book%3A_Analytical_Chemistry_2.0_(Harvey)/05_Standardizing_Analytical_Methods/5.4%3A_Linear_Regression_and_Calibration_Curves Linear Regression and Calibration Curves]
Line 513: Line 513:
</syntaxhighlight> From the simulated data, we see IPA = -3.16e-3 for a calibrated model and IPA = -1.86 for a severely miscalibrated model.
</syntaxhighlight> From the simulated data, we see IPA = -3.16e-3 for a calibrated model and IPA = -1.86 for a severely miscalibrated model.


== ROC curve and Brier score ==
= ROC curve and Brier score =
* Binary case:
* Binary case:
** Y = true '''positive''' rate = sensitivity,  
** Y = true '''positive''' rate = sensitivity,  
Line 536: Line 536:
* Generally, an AUC value over 0.7 is indicative of a model that can distinguish between the two outcomes well. An AUC of 0.5 tells us that the model is a random classifier, and it cannot distinguish between the two outcomes.
* Generally, an AUC value over 0.7 is indicative of a model that can distinguish between the two outcomes well. An AUC of 0.5 tells us that the model is a random classifier, and it cannot distinguish between the two outcomes.


=== Survival data ===
== Survival data ==
'Survival Model Predictive Accuracy and ROC Curves' by Heagerty & Zheng 2005
'Survival Model Predictive Accuracy and ROC Curves' by Heagerty & Zheng 2005
* Recall '''Sensitivity=''' <math>P(\hat{p_i} > c | Y_i=1)</math>, '''Specificity=''' <math>P(\hat{p}_i \le c | Y_i=0</math>), <math>Y_i</math> is binary outcomes, <math>\hat{p}_i</math> is a prediction, <math>c</math> is a criterion for classifying the prediction as positive (<math>\hat{p}_i > c</math>) or negative (<math>\hat{p}_i \le c </math>).
* Recall '''Sensitivity=''' <math>P(\hat{p_i} > c | Y_i=1)</math>, '''Specificity=''' <math>P(\hat{p}_i \le c | Y_i=0</math>), <math>Y_i</math> is binary outcomes, <math>\hat{p}_i</math> is a prediction, <math>c</math> is a criterion for classifying the prediction as positive (<math>\hat{p}_i > c</math>) or negative (<math>\hat{p}_i \le c </math>).
Line 543: Line 543:
* ROC curves are useful for comparing the discriminatory capacity of different potential biomarkers.
* ROC curves are useful for comparing the discriminatory capacity of different potential biomarkers.


=== Confusion matrix, Sensitivity/Specificity/Accuracy ===
== Confusion matrix, Sensitivity/Specificity/Accuracy ==


{| border="1" style="border-collapse:collapse; text-align:center;"
{| border="1" style="border-collapse:collapse; text-align:center;"
Line 572: Line 572:
::<math> \text{NPV} = \frac{\text{specificity} \times (1-\text{prevalence})}{(1-\text{sensitivity}) \times \text{prevalence}+\text{specificity} \times (1-\text{prevalence})} </math>
::<math> \text{NPV} = \frac{\text{specificity} \times (1-\text{prevalence})}{(1-\text{sensitivity}) \times \text{prevalence}+\text{specificity} \times (1-\text{prevalence})} </math>


=== Precision recall curve ===
== Precision recall curve ==
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precision_and_recall Precision and recall]
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precision_and_recall Precision and recall]
** Y-axis: Precision = tp/(tp + fp) = PPV, large is better
** Y-axis: Precision = tp/(tp + fp) = PPV, large is better
Line 580: Line 580:
** X-axis: 1-Specificity = fp/(fp + tn)
** X-axis: 1-Specificity = fp/(fp + tn)


=== Incidence, Prevalence ===
== Incidence, Prevalence ==
https://www.health.ny.gov/diseases/chronic/basicstat.htm
https://www.health.ny.gov/diseases/chronic/basicstat.htm


=== Calculate area under curve by hand (using trapezoid), relation to concordance measure and the Wilcoxon–Mann–Whitney test ===
== Calculate area under curve by hand (using trapezoid), relation to concordance measure and the Wilcoxon–Mann–Whitney test ==
* https://stats.stackexchange.com/a/146174
* https://stats.stackexchange.com/a/146174
* [https://pubs.rsna.org/doi/pdf/10.1148/radiology.143.1.7063747 The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve] J A Hanley, B J McNeil 1982
* [https://pubs.rsna.org/doi/pdf/10.1148/radiology.143.1.7063747 The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve] J A Hanley, B J McNeil 1982


=== genefilter package and rowpAUCs function ===
== genefilter package and rowpAUCs function ==
* [https://books.google.com/books?id=F3tAehmRHSwC&pg=PA99&lpg=PA99&dq=%22rowpAUCs%22+genefilter&source=bl&ots=QYRYDc45Dp&sig=6b29AsNivFPdyvcU1z3Okn121OU&hl=en&sa=X&ei=mFvCVN35NdaSsQSUqIKYCg&ved=0CE8Q6AEwCTgK#v=onepage&q=%22rowpAUCs%22%20genefilter&f=false rowpAUCs] function in genefilter package. The aim is to find potential biomarkers whose expression level is able to distinguish between two groups.
* [https://books.google.com/books?id=F3tAehmRHSwC&pg=PA99&lpg=PA99&dq=%22rowpAUCs%22+genefilter&source=bl&ots=QYRYDc45Dp&sig=6b29AsNivFPdyvcU1z3Okn121OU&hl=en&sa=X&ei=mFvCVN35NdaSsQSUqIKYCg&ved=0CE8Q6AEwCTgK#v=onepage&q=%22rowpAUCs%22%20genefilter&f=false rowpAUCs] function in genefilter package. The aim is to find potential biomarkers whose expression level is able to distinguish between two groups.
<pre>
<pre>
Line 606: Line 606:
</pre>
</pre>


=== Use and Misuse of the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve in Risk Prediction ===
== Use and Misuse of the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve in Risk Prediction ==
http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/115/7/928
http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/115/7/928


=== Performance evaluation ===
== Performance evaluation ==
* [https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/sim.5727 Testing for improvement in prediction model performance] by Pepe et al 2013.
* [https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/sim.5727 Testing for improvement in prediction model performance] by Pepe et al 2013.


=== Some R packages ===
== Some R packages ==
* [https://rviews.rstudio.com/2019/03/01/some-r-packages-for-roc-curves/ Some R Packages for ROC Curves]
* [https://rviews.rstudio.com/2019/03/01/some-r-packages-for-roc-curves/ Some R Packages for ROC Curves]
* [https://github.com/dariyasydykova/open_projects/tree/master/ROC_animation ROC animation]
* [https://github.com/dariyasydykova/open_projects/tree/master/ROC_animation ROC animation]


=== Comparison of two AUCs ===
== Comparison of two AUCs ==
* [https://statcompute.wordpress.com/2018/12/25/statistical-assessments-of-auc/ Statistical Assessments of AUC]. This is using the '''pROC::roc.test''' function.
* [https://statcompute.wordpress.com/2018/12/25/statistical-assessments-of-auc/ Statistical Assessments of AUC]. This is using the '''pROC::roc.test''' function.


== [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_reclassification_improvement NRI] (Net reclassification improvement) ==
= [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_reclassification_improvement NRI] (Net reclassification improvement) =


== Maximum likelihood ==
= Maximum likelihood =
[http://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/622/what-is-the-difference-between-a-partial-likelihood-profile-likelihood-and-marg Difference of partial likelihood, profile likelihood and marginal likelihood]
[http://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/622/what-is-the-difference-between-a-partial-likelihood-profile-likelihood-and-marg Difference of partial likelihood, profile likelihood and marginal likelihood]


== Generalized Linear Model ==
= Generalized Linear Model =
Lectures from a course in [http://people.stat.sfu.ca/~raltman/stat851.html Simon Fraser University Statistics].  
Lectures from a course in [http://people.stat.sfu.ca/~raltman/stat851.html Simon Fraser University Statistics].  


[https://petolau.github.io/Analyzing-double-seasonal-time-series-with-GAM-in-R/ Doing magic and analyzing seasonal time series with GAM (Generalized Additive Model) in R]
[https://petolau.github.io/Analyzing-double-seasonal-time-series-with-GAM-in-R/ Doing magic and analyzing seasonal time series with GAM (Generalized Additive Model) in R]


=== Quasi Likelihood ===
== Quasi Likelihood ==
Quasi-likelihood is like log-likelihood. The quasi-score function (first derivative of quasi-likelihood function) is the estimating equation.
Quasi-likelihood is like log-likelihood. The quasi-score function (first derivative of quasi-likelihood function) is the estimating equation.


Line 637: Line 637:
* [http://www.maths.usyd.edu.au/u/jchan/GLM/QuasiLikelihood.pdf This lecture] contains a table of quasi likelihood from common distributions.
* [http://www.maths.usyd.edu.au/u/jchan/GLM/QuasiLikelihood.pdf This lecture] contains a table of quasi likelihood from common distributions.


=== Plot ===
== Plot ==
https://strengejacke.wordpress.com/2015/02/05/sjplot-package-and-related-online-manuals-updated-rstats-ggplot/
https://strengejacke.wordpress.com/2015/02/05/sjplot-package-and-related-online-manuals-updated-rstats-ggplot/


=== [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deviance_(statistics) Deviance], stats::deviance() and glmnet::deviance.glmnet() from R ===
== [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deviance_(statistics) Deviance], stats::deviance() and glmnet::deviance.glmnet() from R ==
* '''It is a generalization of the idea of using the sum of squares of residuals (RSS) in ordinary least squares''' to cases where model-fitting is achieved by maximum likelihood. See [https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/6581/what-is-deviance-specifically-in-cart-rpart What is Deviance? (specifically in CART/rpart)] to manually compute deviance and compare it with the returned value of the '''deviance()''' function from a linear regression. Summary: deviance() = RSS in linear models.
* '''It is a generalization of the idea of using the sum of squares of residuals (RSS) in ordinary least squares''' to cases where model-fitting is achieved by maximum likelihood. See [https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/6581/what-is-deviance-specifically-in-cart-rpart What is Deviance? (specifically in CART/rpart)] to manually compute deviance and compare it with the returned value of the '''deviance()''' function from a linear regression. Summary: deviance() = RSS in linear models.
* https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/stats/versions/3.4.3/topics/deviance
* https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/stats/versions/3.4.3/topics/deviance
Line 705: Line 705:
</syntaxhighlight>
</syntaxhighlight>


=== Saturated model ===
== Saturated model ==
* The saturated model always has n parameters where n is the sample size.
* The saturated model always has n parameters where n is the sample size.
* [https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/114073/logistic-regression-how-to-obtain-a-saturated-model Logistic Regression : How to obtain a saturated model]
* [https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/114073/logistic-regression-how-to-obtain-a-saturated-model Logistic Regression : How to obtain a saturated model]


== Simulate data ==
= Simulate data =
=== Density plot ===
== Density plot ==
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
# plot a Weibull distribution with shape and scale
# plot a Weibull distribution with shape and scale
Line 726: Line 726:
* Shape >1: failure rate increases with time
* Shape >1: failure rate increases with time


=== Simulate data from a specified density ===
== Simulate data from a specified density ==
* http://stackoverflow.com/questions/16134786/simulate-data-from-non-standard-density-function
* http://stackoverflow.com/questions/16134786/simulate-data-from-non-standard-density-function


=== Signal to noise ratio ===
== Signal to noise ratio ==
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal-to-noise_ratio
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal-to-noise_ratio
* https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/31158/how-to-simulate-signal-noise-ratio
* https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/31158/how-to-simulate-signal-noise-ratio
Line 740: Line 740:
* [https://academic.oup.com/biostatistics/article/19/3/263/4093306#123138354 A framework for estimating and testing qualitative interactions with applications to predictive biomarkers] Roth, Biostatistics, 2018
* [https://academic.oup.com/biostatistics/article/19/3/263/4093306#123138354 A framework for estimating and testing qualitative interactions with applications to predictive biomarkers] Roth, Biostatistics, 2018


=== Effect size, Cohen's d and volcano plot ===
== Effect size, Cohen's d and volcano plot ==
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effect_size (See also the estimation by the [[#Two_sample_test_assuming_equal_variance|pooled sd]])
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effect_size (See also the estimation by the [[#Two_sample_test_assuming_equal_variance|pooled sd]])


Line 752: Line 752:
** X-axis: log2 fold change OR effect size (Cohen's D). [https://twitter.com/biobenkj/status/1072141825568329728 An example] from RNA-Seq data.
** X-axis: log2 fold change OR effect size (Cohen's D). [https://twitter.com/biobenkj/status/1072141825568329728 An example] from RNA-Seq data.


== Multiple comparisons ==
= Multiple comparisons =
* If you perform experiments over and over, you's bound to find something. So significance level must be adjusted down when performing multiple hypothesis tests.
* If you perform experiments over and over, you's bound to find something. So significance level must be adjusted down when performing multiple hypothesis tests.
* http://www.gs.washington.edu/academics/courses/akey/56008/lecture/lecture10.pdf
* http://www.gs.washington.edu/academics/courses/akey/56008/lecture/lecture10.pdf
Line 766: Line 766:
According to [https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-basics/lifetime-probability-of-developing-or-dying-from-cancer.html Lifetime Risk of Developing or Dying From Cancer], there is a 39.7% risk of developing a cancer for male during his lifetime (in other words, 1 out of every 2.52 men in US will develop some kind of cancer during his lifetime) and 37.6% for female. So the probability of getting at least one cancer patient in a 3-generation family is 1-.6**3 - .63**3 = 0.95.
According to [https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-basics/lifetime-probability-of-developing-or-dying-from-cancer.html Lifetime Risk of Developing or Dying From Cancer], there is a 39.7% risk of developing a cancer for male during his lifetime (in other words, 1 out of every 2.52 men in US will develop some kind of cancer during his lifetime) and 37.6% for female. So the probability of getting at least one cancer patient in a 3-generation family is 1-.6**3 - .63**3 = 0.95.


=== False Discovery Rate ===
== False Discovery Rate ==
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_discovery_rate
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_discovery_rate
* Paper [http://www.stat.purdue.edu/~doerge/BIOINFORM.D/FALL06/Benjamini%20and%20Y%20FDR.pdf Definition] by Benjamini and Hochberg in JRSS B 1995.
* Paper [http://www.stat.purdue.edu/~doerge/BIOINFORM.D/FALL06/Benjamini%20and%20Y%20FDR.pdf Definition] by Benjamini and Hochberg in JRSS B 1995.
Line 796: Line 796:
[[File:Scatterhist.svg|350px]]
[[File:Scatterhist.svg|350px]]


=== q-value ===
== q-value ==
q-value is defined as the minimum FDR that can be attained when calling that '''feature''' significant (i.e., expected proportion of false positives incurred when calling that feature significant).
q-value is defined as the minimum FDR that can be attained when calling that '''feature''' significant (i.e., expected proportion of false positives incurred when calling that feature significant).


If gene X has a q-value of 0.013 it means that 1.3% of genes that show p-values at least as small as gene X are false positives.
If gene X has a q-value of 0.013 it means that 1.3% of genes that show p-values at least as small as gene X are false positives.


=== SAM/Significance Analysis of Microarrays ===
== SAM/Significance Analysis of Microarrays ==
The percentile option is used to define the number of falsely called genes based on 'B' permutations. If we use the 90-th percentile, the number of significant genes will be less than if we use the 50-th percentile/median.
The percentile option is used to define the number of falsely called genes based on 'B' permutations. If we use the 90-th percentile, the number of significant genes will be less than if we use the 50-th percentile/median.


In BRCA dataset, using the 90-th percentile will get 29 genes vs 183 genes if we use median.
In BRCA dataset, using the 90-th percentile will get 29 genes vs 183 genes if we use median.


=== Multivariate permutation test ===
== Multivariate permutation test ==
In BRCA dataset, using 80% confidence gives 116 genes vs 237 genes if we use 50% confidence (assuming maximum proportion of false discoveries is 10%). The method is published on [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378375803002118 EL Korn, JF Troendle, LM McShane and R Simon, ''Controlling the number of false discoveries: Application to high dimensional genomic data'', Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, vol 124, 379-398 (2004)].
In BRCA dataset, using 80% confidence gives 116 genes vs 237 genes if we use 50% confidence (assuming maximum proportion of false discoveries is 10%). The method is published on [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378375803002118 EL Korn, JF Troendle, LM McShane and R Simon, ''Controlling the number of false discoveries: Application to high dimensional genomic data'', Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, vol 124, 379-398 (2004)].


=== String Permutations Algorithm ===
== String Permutations Algorithm ==
https://youtu.be/nYFd7VHKyWQ
https://youtu.be/nYFd7VHKyWQ


=== Empirical Bayes Normal Means Problem with Correlated Noise ===
== Empirical Bayes Normal Means Problem with Correlated Noise ==
[https://arxiv.org/abs/1812.07488 Solving the Empirical Bayes Normal Means Problem with Correlated Noise] Sun 2018
[https://arxiv.org/abs/1812.07488 Solving the Empirical Bayes Normal Means Problem with Correlated Noise] Sun 2018


The package [https://github.com/LSun/cashr cashr] and the [https://github.com/LSun/cashr_paper source code of the paper]
The package [https://github.com/LSun/cashr cashr] and the [https://github.com/LSun/cashr_paper source code of the paper]


== Bayes ==
= Bayes =
=== Bayes factor ===
== Bayes factor ==
* http://www.nicebread.de/what-does-a-bayes-factor-feel-like/
* http://www.nicebread.de/what-does-a-bayes-factor-feel-like/


=== Empirical Bayes method ===
== Empirical Bayes method ==
* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empirical_Bayes_method
* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empirical_Bayes_method
* [http://varianceexplained.org/r/empirical-bayes-book/ Introduction to Empirical Bayes: Examples from Baseball Statistics]
* [http://varianceexplained.org/r/empirical-bayes-book/ Introduction to Empirical Bayes: Examples from Baseball Statistics]


=== Naive Bayes classifier ===
== Naive Bayes classifier ==
[http://r-posts.com/understanding-naive-bayes-classifier-using-r/ Understanding Naïve Bayes Classifier Using R]
[http://r-posts.com/understanding-naive-bayes-classifier-using-r/ Understanding Naïve Bayes Classifier Using R]


=== MCMC ===
== MCMC ==
[https://stablemarkets.wordpress.com/2018/03/16/speeding-up-metropolis-hastings-with-rcpp/ Speeding up Metropolis-Hastings with Rcpp]
[https://stablemarkets.wordpress.com/2018/03/16/speeding-up-metropolis-hastings-with-rcpp/ Speeding up Metropolis-Hastings with Rcpp]


== offset() function ==
= offset() function =
* An '''offset''' is a term to be added to a linear predictor, such as in a generalised linear model, with known coefficient 1 rather than an estimated coefficient.
* An '''offset''' is a term to be added to a linear predictor, such as in a generalised linear model, with known coefficient 1 rather than an estimated coefficient.
* https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/stats/versions/3.5.0/topics/offset
* https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/stats/versions/3.5.0/topics/offset


=== Offset in Poisson regression ===
== Offset in Poisson regression ==
* http://rfunction.com/archives/223
* http://rfunction.com/archives/223
* https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/11182/when-to-use-an-offset-in-a-poisson-regression
* https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/11182/when-to-use-an-offset-in-a-poisson-regression
Line 867: Line 867:
</syntaxhighlight>
</syntaxhighlight>


=== Offset in Cox regression ===
== Offset in Cox regression ==
An example from [https://github.com/cran/biospear/blob/master/R/PCAlasso.R biospear::PCAlasso()]
An example from [https://github.com/cran/biospear/blob/master/R/PCAlasso.R biospear::PCAlasso()]
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
Line 891: Line 891:
</syntaxhighlight>
</syntaxhighlight>


=== Offset in linear regression ===
== Offset in linear regression ==
* https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/stats/versions/3.5.1/topics/lm
* https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/stats/versions/3.5.1/topics/lm
* https://stackoverflow.com/questions/16920628/use-of-offset-in-lm-regression-r
* https://stackoverflow.com/questions/16920628/use-of-offset-in-lm-regression-r


== Overdispersion ==
= Overdispersion =
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overdispersion
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overdispersion


Var(Y) = phi * E(Y). If phi > 1, then it is overdispersion relative to Poisson. If phi <1, we have under-dispersion (rare).
Var(Y) = phi * E(Y). If phi > 1, then it is overdispersion relative to Poisson. If phi <1, we have under-dispersion (rare).


=== Heterogeneity ===
== Heterogeneity ==
The Poisson model fit is not good; residual deviance/df >> 1. The lack of fit maybe due to missing data, covariates or overdispersion.
The Poisson model fit is not good; residual deviance/df >> 1. The lack of fit maybe due to missing data, covariates or overdispersion.


Line 910: Line 910:
Consider Quasi-Poisson or negative binomial.
Consider Quasi-Poisson or negative binomial.


=== Test of overdispersion or underdispersion in Poisson models ===
== Test of overdispersion or underdispersion in Poisson models ==
https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/66586/is-there-a-test-to-determine-whether-glm-overdispersion-is-significant
https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/66586/is-there-a-test-to-determine-whether-glm-overdispersion-is-significant


=== Negative Binomial ===
== Negative Binomial ==
The mean of the Poisson distribution can itself be thought of as a random variable drawn from the gamma distribution thereby introducing an additional free parameter.
The mean of the Poisson distribution can itself be thought of as a random variable drawn from the gamma distribution thereby introducing an additional free parameter.


=== Binomial ===
== Binomial ==
* [https://www.rdatagen.net/post/overdispersed-binomial-data/ Generating and modeling over-dispersed binomial data]
* [https://www.rdatagen.net/post/overdispersed-binomial-data/ Generating and modeling over-dispersed binomial data]
* [https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/simstudy/index.html simstudy] package. The final data sets can represent data from '''randomized control trials''', '''repeated measure (longitudinal) designs''', and cluster randomized trials. Missingness can be generated using various mechanisms (MCAR, MAR, NMAR).
* [https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/simstudy/index.html simstudy] package. The final data sets can represent data from '''randomized control trials''', '''repeated measure (longitudinal) designs''', and cluster randomized trials. Missingness can be generated using various mechanisms (MCAR, MAR, NMAR).


== Count data ==
= Count data =
=== Zero counts ===
== Zero counts ==
* [https://doi.org/10.1080/00031305.2018.1444673 A Method to Handle Zero Counts in the Multinomial Model]
* [https://doi.org/10.1080/00031305.2018.1444673 A Method to Handle Zero Counts in the Multinomial Model]


=== Bias ===
== Bias ==
[https://amstat.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00031305.2018.1564699 Bias in Small-Sample Inference With Count-Data Models] Blackburn 2019
[https://amstat.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00031305.2018.1564699 Bias in Small-Sample Inference With Count-Data Models] Blackburn 2019


== Survival data ==
= Survival data =
* [https://www.mayo.edu/research/documents/tr53pdf/DOC-10027379 A Package for Survival Analysis in S] by Terry M. Therneau, 1999
* [https://www.mayo.edu/research/documents/tr53pdf/DOC-10027379 A Package for Survival Analysis in S] by Terry M. Therneau, 1999
* https://web.stanford.edu/~lutian/coursepdf/stat331.HTML and https://web.stanford.edu/~lutian/coursepdf/ ([https://web.stanford.edu/~lutian/coursepdf/survweek5.pdf#page=7 3 types of tests]).
* https://web.stanford.edu/~lutian/coursepdf/stat331.HTML and https://web.stanford.edu/~lutian/coursepdf/ ([https://web.stanford.edu/~lutian/coursepdf/survweek5.pdf#page=7 3 types of tests]).
Line 948: Line 948:
* [http://bioconnector.org/workshops/r-survival.html#survival_analysis_in_r Survival Analysis with R] from bioconnector.og.
* [http://bioconnector.org/workshops/r-survival.html#survival_analysis_in_r Survival Analysis with R] from bioconnector.og.


=== [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censoring_(statistics) Censoring] ===
== [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censoring_(statistics) Censoring] ==
[http://stat.wvu.edu/~rmnatsak/Note3_547.pdf Sample schemes of incomplete data]
[http://stat.wvu.edu/~rmnatsak/Note3_547.pdf Sample schemes of incomplete data]
* Type I censoring: the censoring time is fixed
* Type I censoring: the censoring time is fixed
Line 970: Line 970:
* status=0/1/2 for censored, relapse and dead in randomForestSRC::follic data.
* status=0/1/2 for censored, relapse and dead in randomForestSRC::follic data.


=== How to explore survival data ===
== How to explore survival data ==
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survival_analysis#Survival_analysis_in_R
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survival_analysis#Survival_analysis_in_R


* Create graph of length of time that each subject was in the study
* Create graph of length of time that each subject was in the study
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
library(survival)
# sort the aml data by time
aml <- aml[order(aml$time),]
with(aml, plot(time, type="h"))
</syntaxhighlight>
[[File:Aml time.svg|px=100]]
* Create the life table survival object
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
summary(aml.survfit)
Call: survfit(formula = Surv(time, status == 1) ~ 1, data = aml)
time n.risk n.event survival std.err lower 95% CI upper 95% CI
    5    23      2  0.9130  0.0588      0.8049        1.000
    8    21      2  0.8261  0.0790      0.6848        0.996
    9    19      1  0.7826  0.0860      0.6310        0.971
  12    18      1  0.7391  0.0916      0.5798        0.942
  13    17      1  0.6957  0.0959      0.5309        0.912
  18    14      1  0.6460  0.1011      0.4753        0.878
  23    13      2  0.5466  0.1073      0.3721        0.803
  27    11      1  0.4969  0.1084      0.3240        0.762
  30      9      1  0.4417  0.1095      0.2717        0.718
  31      8      1  0.3865  0.1089      0.2225        0.671
  33      7      1  0.3313  0.1064      0.1765        0.622
  34      6      1  0.2761  0.1020      0.1338        0.569
  43      5      1  0.2208  0.0954      0.0947        0.515
  45      4      1  0.1656  0.0860      0.0598        0.458
  48      2      1  0.0828  0.0727      0.0148        0.462
</syntaxhighlight>
* Kaplan-Meier curve for aml with the confidence bounds.
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
plot(aml.survfit, xlab = "Time", ylab="Proportion surviving")
</syntaxhighlight>
* Create aml life tables broken out by treatment (x,  "Maintained" vs. "Not maintained")
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
surv.by.aml.rx <- survfit(Surv(time, status == 1) ~ x, data = aml)
summary(surv.by.aml.rx)
Call: survfit(formula = Surv(time, status == 1) ~ x, data = aml)
                x=Maintained
time n.risk n.event survival std.err lower 95% CI upper 95% CI
    9    11      1    0.909  0.0867      0.7541        1.000
  13    10      1    0.818  0.1163      0.6192        1.000
  18      8      1    0.716  0.1397      0.4884        1.000
  23      7      1    0.614  0.1526      0.3769        0.999
  31      5      1    0.491  0.1642      0.2549        0.946
  34      4      1    0.368  0.1627      0.1549        0.875
  48      2      1    0.184  0.1535      0.0359        0.944
                x=Nonmaintained
time n.risk n.event survival std.err lower 95% CI upper 95% CI
    5    12      2  0.8333  0.1076      0.6470        1.000
    8    10      2  0.6667  0.1361      0.4468        0.995
  12      8      1  0.5833  0.1423      0.3616        0.941
  23      6      1  0.4861  0.1481      0.2675        0.883
  27      5      1  0.3889  0.1470      0.1854        0.816
  30      4      1  0.2917  0.1387      0.1148        0.741
  33      3      1  0.1944  0.1219      0.0569        0.664
  43      2      1  0.0972  0.0919      0.0153        0.620
  45      1      1  0.0000    NaN          NA          NA
</syntaxhighlight>
* Plot KM plot broken out by treatment
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
plot(surv.by.aml.rx, xlab = "Time", ylab="Survival",
    col=c("black", "red"), lty = 1:2,
    main="Kaplan-Meier Survival vs. Maintenance in AML")
legend(100, .6, c("Maintained", "Not maintained"),
    lty = 1:2, col=c("black", "red"))
</syntaxhighlight>
* Perform the log rank test using the R function survdiff().
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
surv.diff.aml <- survdiff(Surv(time, status == 1) ~ x, data=aml)
surv.diff.aml
Call:
survdiff(formula = Surv(time, status == 1) ~ x, data = aml)
                N Observed Expected (O-E)^2/E (O-E)^2/V
x=Maintained    11        7    10.69      1.27      3.4
x=Nonmaintained 12      11    7.31      1.86      3.4
Chisq= 3.4  on 1 degrees of freedom, p= 0.07
</syntaxhighlight>
==== Some public data ====
{| class="wikitable"
! package
! data (sample size)
|-
| [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/survival/versions/2.43-1 survival]
| pbc (418), ovarian (26), aml/leukemia (23), colon (1858), lung (228), veteran (137)
|-
| [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/pec/versions/2018.07.26 pec]
| GBSG2 (686), cost (518)
|-
| [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/randomForestSRC/versions/2.7.0 randomForestSRC]
| follic (541)
|-
| [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/KMsurv/versions/0.1-5 KMsurv]
| A LOT. tongue (80)
|-
| [https://rdrr.io/cran/survivalROC/man/ survivalROC]
| mayo (312)
|-
| [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/survAUC/versions/1.0-5 survAUC]
| NA
|}
=== Kaplan & Meier and Nelson-Aalen: survfit.formula(), Surv() ===
* Landmarks
** Kaplan-Meier: 1958
** Nelson: 1969
** Cox and Brewlow: 1972 S(t) = exp(-Lambda(t))
** Aalen: 1978 Lambda(t)
* D distinct times <math>t_1 < t_2 < \cdots < t_D</math>. At time <math>t_i</math> there are <math>d_i</math> events. Let <math>Y_i</math> be the number of individuals who are at risk at time <math>t_i</math>. The quantity <math>d_i/Y_i</math> provides an estimate of the conditional probability that an individual who survives to just prior to time <math>t_i</math> experiences the event at time <math>t_i</math>. The '''KM estimator of the survival function''' and the '''Nelson-Aalen estimator of the cumulative hazard''' (their relationship is given below) are define as follows (<math>t_1 \le t</math>):
: <math>
\begin{align}
\hat{S}(t) &= \prod_{t_i \le t} [1 - d_i/Y_i] \\
\hat{H}(t) &= \sum_{t_i \le t} d_i/Y_i
\end{align}
</math>
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
str(kidney)
'data.frame': 76 obs. of  7 variables:
$ id    : num  1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 ...
$ time  : num  8 16 23 13 22 28 447 318 30 12 ...
$ status : num  1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 ...
$ age    : num  28 28 48 48 32 32 31 32 10 10 ...
$ sex    : num  1 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 ...
$ disease: Factor w/ 4 levels "Other","GN","AN",..: 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 ...
$ frail  : num  2.3 2.3 1.9 1.9 1.2 1.2 0.5 0.5 1.5 1.5 ...
kidney[order(kidney$time), c("time", "status")]
kidney[kidney$time == 13, ] # one is dead and the other is alive
length(unique(kidney$time)) # 60
sfit <- survfit(Surv(time, status) ~ 1, data = kidney)
sfit
Call: survfit(formula = Surv(time, status) ~ 1, data = kidney)
      n  events  median 0.95LCL 0.95UCL
    76      58      78      39    152
str(sfit)
List of 13
$ n        : int 76
$ time    : num [1:60] 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 12 13 15 ...
$ n.risk  : num [1:60] 76 75 74 72 71 69 65 64 62 60 ...
$ n.event  : num [1:60] 1 0 0 0 2 2 1 2 1 2 ...
$ n.censor : num [1:60] 0 1 2 1 0 2 0 0 1 0 ...
$ surv    : num [1:60] 0.987 0.987 0.987 0.987 0.959 ...
$ type    : chr "right"
length(unique(kidney$time))  # [1] 60
all(sapply(sfit$time, function(tt) sum(kidney$time >= tt)) == sfit$n.risk) # TRUE
all(sapply(sfit$time, function(tt) sum(kidney$status[kidney$time == tt])) == sfit$n.event) # TRUE
all(sapply(sfit$time, function(tt) sum(1-kidney$status[kidney$time == tt])) == sfit$n.censor) #  TRUE
all(cumprod(1 - sfit$n.event/sfit$n.risk) == sfit$surv) #  FALSE
range(abs(cumprod(1 - sfit$n.event/sfit$n.risk) - sfit$surv))
# [1] 0.000000e+00 1.387779e-17
summary(sfit)
time n.risk n.event survival std.err lower 95% CI upper 95% CI
    2    76      1    0.987  0.0131      0.96155        1.000
    7    71      2    0.959  0.0232      0.91469        1.000
    8    69      2    0.931  0.0297      0.87484        0.991
...
  511      3      1    0.042  0.0288      0.01095        0.161
  536      2      1    0.021  0.0207      0.00305        0.145
  562      1      1    0.000    NaN          NA          NA
</syntaxhighlight>
* Note that the KM estimate is '''left-continuous''' step function with the intervals closed at left and open at right. For <math>t \in [t_j, t_{j+1})</math> for a certain ''j'', we have <math>\hat{S}(t) = \prod_{i=1}^j (1-d_i/n_i)</math> where <math>d_i</math> is the number people who have an event during the interval <math>[t_i, t_{i+1})</math> and <math>n_i</math> is the number of people at risk just before the beginning of the interval <math>[t_i, t_{i+1})</math>.
* The product-limit estimator can be constructed by using a ''reduced-sample'' approach. We can estimate the <math>P(T > t_i | T \ge t_i) = \frac{Y_i - d_i}{Y_i}</math> for <math>i=1,2,\cdots,D</math>. <math>
S(t_i) = \frac{S(t_i)}{S(t_{i-1})} \frac{S(t_{i-1})}{S(t_{i-2})} \cdots \frac{S(t_2)}{S(t_1)} \frac{S(t_1)}{S(0)} S(0) = P(T > t_i | T \ge t_i) P(T >t_{i-1} | T \ge t_{i-1}) \cdots P(T>t_2|T \ge t_2) P(T>t_1 | T \ge t_1)</math> because S(0)=1 and, for a discrete distribution, <math>S(t_{i-1}) = P(T > t_{i-1}) = P(T \ge t_i)</math>.
* '''Self consistency'''. If we had no censored observations, the estimator of the survival function at a time ''t'' is the proportion of observations which are larger than ''t'', that is, <math>\hat{S}(t) = \frac{1}{n}\sum I(X_i > t)</math>.
* Curves are plotted in the same order as they are listed by print (which gives a 1 line summary of each). For example, -1 < 1 and 'Maintenance' < 'Nonmaintained'. That means, the labels list in the legend() command should have the same order as the curves.
* Kaplan and Meier is used to give an estimator of the survival function S(t)
* Nelson-Aalen estimator is for the cumulative hazard H(t). Note that <math>0 \le H(t) < \infty</math> and <math>H(t) \rightarrow \infty</math> as t goes to infinity. So there is a constraint on the hazard function, see [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survival_analysis Wikipedia].
Note that S(t) is related to H(t) by <math>H(t) = -ln[S(t)]</math> or <math>S(t) = exp[-H(t)] </math>.
The two estimators are similar (see example 4.1A and 4.1B from Klein and Moeschberge).
The Nelson-Aalen estimator has two primary uses in analyzing data
# Selecting between parametric models for the time to event
# Crude estimates of the hazard rate h(t). This is related to the estimation of the survival function in Cox model. See 8.6 of Klein and Moeschberge.
The Kaplan–Meier estimator (the product limit estimator) is an estimator for estimating the survival function from lifetime data. In medical research, it is often used to measure the fraction of patients living for a certain amount of time after treatment.
Note that
* '''The "+" sign in the KM curves means censored observations (this convention matches with the output of Surv() function) and a long vertical line (not '+') means there is a dead observation at that time.'''
: <syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
> aml[1:5,]
  time status          x
1    9      1 Maintained
2  13      1 Maintained
3  13      0 Maintained
4  18      1 Maintained
5  23      1 Maintained
> Surv(aml$time, aml$status)[1:5,]
[1]  9  13  13+ 18  23
</syntaxhighlight>
* '''If the last observation (longest survival time) is dead, the survival curve will goes down to zero. Otherwise, the survival curve will remain flat from the last event time.'''
Usually the KM curve of treatment group is higher than that of the control group.
The Y-axis (the probability that a member from a given population will have a lifetime exceeding time) is often called
* Cumulative probability
* Cumulative survival
* Percent survival
* Probability without event
* Proportion alive/surviving
* Survival
* Survival probability
[[File:KMcurve.png|400px]]
[[File:KMcurve cumhaz.png|400px]]
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
> library(survival)
> str(aml$x)
Factor w/ 2 levels "Maintained","Nonmaintained": 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ...
> plot(leukemia.surv <- survfit(Surv(time, status) ~ x, data = aml[7:17,] ) ,
      lty=2:3, mark.time = TRUE) # a (small) subset, mark.time is used to show censored obs
> aml[7:17,]
  time status            x
7    31      1    Maintained
8    34      1    Maintained
9    45      0    Maintained
10  48      1    Maintained
11  161      0    Maintained
12    5      1 Nonmaintained
13    5      1 Nonmaintained
14    8      1 Nonmaintained
15    8      1 Nonmaintained
16  12      1 Nonmaintained
17  16      0 Nonmaintained
> legend(100, .9, c("Maintenance", "No Maintenance"), lty = 2:3) # lty: 2=dashed, 3=dotted
> title("Kaplan-Meier Curves\nfor AML Maintenance Study")
# Cumulative hazard plot
# Lambda(t) = -log(S(t));
# see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survival_analysis
# http://statweb.stanford.edu/~olshen/hrp262spring01/spring01Handouts/Phil_doc.pdf
plot(leukemia.surv <- survfit(Surv(time, status) ~ x, data = aml[7:17,] ) ,
      lty=2:3, mark.time = T, fun="cumhaz", ylab="Cumulative Hazard")
</syntaxhighlight>
* Kaplan-Meier estimator from the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaplan%E2%80%93Meier_estimator wikipedia].
* Two papers [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3059453/ this] and  [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3932959/ this] to describe steps to calculate the KM estimate.
* [https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/26247/estimating-a-survival-probability-in-r Estimating a survival probability in R]
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
# https://www.lexjansen.com/pharmasug/2011/CC/PharmaSUG-2011-CC16.pdf
mydata <- data.frame(time=c(3,6,8,12,12,21),status=c(1,1,0,1,1,1))
km <- survfit(Surv(time, status)~1, data=mydata)
plot(km, mark.time = T)
survest <- stepfun(km$time, c(1, km$surv))
plot(survest)
> str(km)
List of 13
$ n        : int 6
$ time    : num [1:5] 3 6 8 12 21
$ n.risk  : num [1:5] 6 5 4 3 1
$ n.event  : num [1:5] 1 1 0 2 1
$ n.censor : num [1:5] 0 0 1 0 0
$ surv    : num [1:5] 0.833 0.667 0.667 0.222 0
$ type    : chr "right"
$ std.err  : num [1:5] 0.183 0.289 0.289 0.866 Inf
$ upper    : num [1:5] 1 1 1 1 NA
$ lower    : num [1:5] 0.5827 0.3786 0.3786 0.0407 NA
$ conf.type: chr "log"
$ conf.int : num 0.95
> class(survest)
[1] "stepfun"  "function"
> survest
Step function
Call: stepfun(km$time, c(1, km$surv))
x[1:5] =      3,      6,      8,    12,    21
6 plateau levels =      1, 0.83333, 0.66667,  ..., 0.22222,      0
> str(survest)
function (v) 
- attr(*, "class")= chr [1:2] "stepfun" "function"
- attr(*, "call")= language stepfun(km$time, c(1, km$surv))
</syntaxhighlight>
[[File:Kmcurve_toy.svg|600px]]
==== Multiple curves ====
Curves/groups are ordered. The first color in the palette is used to color the first level of the factor variable. This is same idea as [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/survminer/versions/0.4.2/topics/ggsurvplot ggsurvplot] in the survminer package. This affects parameters like '''col''' and '''lty''' in plot() function. For example,
* 1<2
* 'c' < 't'
* 'control' < 'treatment'
* 'Control' < 'Treatment'
* 'female' < 'male'.
For '''legend()''', the first category in legend argument will appear at the top of the legend box.
==== Inverse Probability of Censoring Weighted (IPCW) ====
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse_probability_weighting Inverse probability weighting] from Wikipedia
* [https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/bimj.200610301 Consistent Estimation of the Expected Brier Score in General Survival Models with Right‐Censored Event Times] Gerds et al 2006.
* https://www.bmj.com/content/352/bmj.i189.full.print Four examples are considered.
* [https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.0006-341X.2000.00779.x Correcting for Noncompliance and Dependent Censoring in an AIDS Clinical Trial with Inverse Probability of Censoring Weighted (IPCW) Log‐Rank Tests] by James M. Robins, Biometrics 2000.
* [https://amstat.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1198/000313001317098185#.WtO9eOjwb94 The Kaplan–Meier Estimator as an Inverse-Probability-of-Censoring Weighted Average] by Satten 2001. IPCW.
The plots below show by flipping the status variable, we can accurately ''recover'' the survival function of the censoring variable. See [[R#Superimpose_a_density_plot_or_any_curves|the R code here]] for superimposing the true exponential distribution on the KM plot of the censoring variable.
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
require(survival)
n = 10000
beta1 = 2; beta2 = -1
lambdaT = 1 # baseline hazard
lambdaC = 2  # hazard of censoring
set.seed(1234)
x1 = rnorm(n,0)
x2 = rnorm(n,0)
# true event time
T = rweibull(n, shape=1, scale=lambdaT*exp(-beta1*x1-beta2*x2))
# method 1: exponential censoring variable
C <- rweibull(n, shape=1, scale=lambdaC) 
time = pmin(T,C) 
status <- 1*(T <= C)
mean(status)
summary(T)
summary(C)
par(mfrow=c(2,1), mar = c(3,4,2,2)+.1)
status2 <- 1-status
plot(survfit(Surv(time, status2) ~ 1),
    ylab="Survival probability",
    main = 'Exponential censoring time')
# method 2: uniform censoring variable
C <- runif(n, 0, 21)
time = pmin(T,C) 
status <- 1*(T <= C)
status2 <- 1-status
plot(survfit(Surv(time, status2) ~ 1),
    ylab="Survival probability",
    main = "Uniform censoring time")
</syntaxhighlight>
[[File:Ipcw.svg|250px]]
==== stepfun() and plot.stepfun() ====
* [https://www.r-bloggers.com/veterinary-epidemiologic-research-modelling-survival-data-non-parametric-analyses/ Draw cumulative hazards using stepfun()]
* For KM curve case, see an example [[#Kaplan_.26_Meier_and_Nelson-Aalen:_survfit.formula.28.29|above]].
==== Survival curves with number at risk at bottom: survminer package ====
R function survminer::ggsurvplot()
* http://www.sthda.com/english/articles/24-ggpubr-publication-ready-plots/81-ggplot2-easy-way-to-mix-multiple-graphs-on-the-same-page/#mix-table-text-and-ggplot
* http://r-addict.com/2016/05/23/Informative-Survival-Plots.html
Paper examples
* [https://www.nature.com/articles/nm.4466/figures/6 High-dimensional single-cell analysis predicts response to anti-PD-1 immunotherapy]
==== Life table ====
* https://www.r-bloggers.com/veterinary-epidemiologic-research-modelling-survival-data-non-parametric-analyses/
* [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/KMsurv/versions/0.1-5/topics/lifetab lifetab()]
=== Alternatives to survival function plot ===
https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/survival/versions/2.43-1/topics/plot.survfit
The '''fun''' argument, a transformation of the survival curve
* fun = "event" or "F": f(y) = 1-y; it calculates P(T < t). This is like a t-year risk (Blanche 2018).
* fun = "cumhaz": cumulative hazard function (f(y) = -log(y)); it calculates H(t). See [https://stats.stackexchange.com/a/60250 Intuition for cumulative hazard function].
=== Breslow estimate ===
* http://support.sas.com/documentation/cdl/en/statug/68162/HTML/default/viewer.htm#statug_lifetest_details03.htm
* Breslow estimate is the exponentiation of the negative Nelson-Aalen estimate of the cumulative hazard function
=== Hazard ratio forest plot: ggforest() from survminer ===
* https://www.datacamp.com/community/tutorials/survival-analysis-R#fifth
=== Survival curve with confidence interval ===
http://www.sthda.com/english/wiki/survminer-r-package-survival-data-analysis-and-visualization
=== Parametric models and survival function for censored data ===
Assume the CDF of survival time ''T'' is <math>F(\cdot)</math> and the CDF of the censoring time ''C'' is <math>G(\cdot)</math>,
: <math>
\begin{align}
P(T>t, \delta=1) &= \int_t^\infty (1-G(s))dF(s), \\
P(T>t, \delta=0) &= \int_t^\infty (1-F(s))dG(s)
\end{align}
</math>
* http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~madigan/W2025/notes/survival.pdf#page=23
* http://www.ms.uky.edu/~mai/sta635/LikelihoodCensor635.pdf#page=2 survival function of <math>f(T, \delta)</math>
* https://web.stanford.edu/~lutian/coursepdf/unit2.pdf#page=3 joint density of <math>f(T, \delta)</math>
* http://data.princeton.edu/wws509/notes/c7.pdf#page=6
* Special case: ''T'' follows [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Log-normal_distribution Log normal distribution] and ''C'' follows <math>U(0, \xi)</math>.
==== R ====
* [https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/flexsurv/index.html flexsurv] package.
* [https://devinincerti.com/2019/06/18/parametric_survival.html Parametric survival modeling] which uses the '''flexsurv''' package.
* Used in [https://cran.rstudio.com/web/packages/simsurv/vignettes/simsurv_usage.html simsurv] package
=== Parametric models and likelihood function for uncensored data ===
[https://stat.ethz.ch/R-manual/R-devel/library/survival/html/plot.survfit.html plot.survfit()]
* Exponential. <math> T \sim Exp(\lambda) </math>. <math>H(t) = \lambda t.</math> and <math>ln(S(t)) = -H(t) = -\lambda t.</math>
* Weibull. <math> T \sim W(\lambda,p).</math> <math>H(t) = \lambda^p t^p.</math> and <math>ln(-ln(S(t))) = ln(\lambda^p t^p)=const + p ln(t) </math>.
http://www.math.ucsd.edu/~rxu/math284/slect4.pdf
See also [http://data.princeton.edu/wws509/notes/c7.pdf#page=9 accelerated life models] where a set of covariates were used to model survival time.
=== Survival modeling ===
==== Accelerated life models - a direct extension of the classical linear model ====
http://data.princeton.edu/wws509/notes/c7.pdf and also Kalbfleish and Prentice (1980).
<math>
log T_i = x_i' \beta + \epsilon_i
</math>
Therefore
* <math>T_i = exp(x_i' \beta) T_{0i} </math>. So if there are two groups (x=1 and x=0), and <math>exp(\beta) = 2</math>, it means one group live twice as long as people in another group.
* <math>S_1(t) = S_0(t/ exp(x' \beta))</math>. This explains the meaning of '''accelerated failure-time'''. '''Depending on the sign of <math>\beta' x</math>, the time is either accelerated by a constant factor or degraded by a constant factor'''. If <math>exp(\beta)=2</math>, the probability that a member in group one (eg treatment) will be alive at age t is exactly the same as the probability that a member in group zero (eg control group) will be alive at age t/2.
* The hazard function <math>\lambda_1(t) = \lambda_0(t/exp(x'\beta))/ exp(x'\beta) </math>. So if <math>exp(\beta)=2</math>, at any given age people in group one would be exposed to half the risk of people in group zero half their age.
In applications,
* If the errors are normally distributed, then we obtain a log-normal model for the T. Estimation of this model for censored data by maximum likelihood is known in the econometric literature as a Tobit model.
* If the errors have an extreme value distribution, then T has an exponential distribution. The hazard <math>\lambda</math> satisfies the log linear model <math>\log \lambda_i = x_i' \beta</math>.
==== Proportional hazard models ====
Note PH models is a type of multiplicative hazard rate models <math>h(x|Z) = h_0(x)c(\beta' Z)</math> where <math>c(\beta' Z) = \exp(\beta ' Z)</math>.
Assumption: Survival curves for two strata (determined by the particular choices of values for covariates) must have '''hazard functions that are proportional over time''' (i.e. '''constant relative hazard over time'''). [https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/24552/proportional-hazards-assumption-meaning Proportional hazards assumption meaning]. The ratio of the hazard rates from two individuals with covariate value <math>Z</math> and <math>Z^*</math> is a constant function time.
: <math>
\begin{align}
\frac{h(t|Z)}{h(t|Z^*)} = \frac{h_0(t)\exp(\beta 'Z)}{h_0(t)\exp(\beta ' Z^*)} = \exp(\beta' (Z-Z^*)) \mbox{    independent of time}
\end{align}
</math>
Test the assumption
* [https://rstudio-pubs-static.s3.amazonaws.com/300535_2a8382af47714d0aaa3f4cce9a7645a3.html Survival Analysis Tutorial] by Jacob Lindell and Joe Berry.
* [https://stat.ethz.ch/R-manual/R-devel/library/survival/html/cox.zph.html cox.zph()] can be used to test the proportional hazards assumption for a Cox regression model fit.
* [https://stat.ethz.ch/education/semesters/ss2011/seminar/contents/handout_4.pdf Log-log Kaplan-Meier curves] and other methods.
* https://stats.idre.ucla.edu/other/examples/asa2/testing-the-proportional-hazard-assumption-in-cox-models/. If the predictor satisfy the proportional hazard assumption then the graph of the survival function versus the survival time should results in a graph with parallel curves, similarly the graph of the log(-log(survival)) versus log of survival time graph should result in parallel lines if the predictor is proportional.  This method does not work well for continuous predictor or categorical predictors that have many levels because the graph becomes to “cluttered”. 
[[#Cox_Regression|Cox Regression]]
=== Weibull and Exponential model to Cox model ===
* https://socserv.socsci.mcmaster.ca/jfox/Books/Companion/appendix/Appendix-Cox-Regression.pdf. It also includes model diagnostic and all stuff is illustrated in R.
* http://stat.ethz.ch/education/semesters/ss2011/seminar/contents/handout_9.pdf
In summary:
* Weibull distribution (Klein) <math>h(t) = p \lambda (\lambda t)^{p-1}</math> and <math>S(t) = exp(-\lambda t^p)</math>. If p >1, then the risk increases over time. If p<1, then the risk decreases over time.
** Note that Weibull distribution has a different parametrization. See http://data.princeton.edu/pop509/ParametricSurvival.pdf#page=2. <math>h(t) = \lambda^p p t^{p-1}</math> and <math>S(t) = exp(-(\lambda t)^p)</math>. [https://stat.ethz.ch/R-manual/R-devel/library/stats/html/Weibull.html R] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weibull_distribution wikipedia] also follows this parametrization except that <math>h(t) = p t^{p-1}/\lambda^p</math> and <math>S(t) = exp(-(t/\lambda)^p)</math>.
* Exponential distribution <math>h(t)</math> = constant (independent of t). This is a special case of Weibull distribution (p=1).
* Weibull (and also exponential) <strike>distribution</strike> regression model is the only case which belongs to both the proportional hazards and the accelerated life families.
: <math>
\begin{align}
\frac{h(x|Z_1)}{h(x|Z_2)} = \frac{h_0(x\exp(-\gamma' Z_1)) \exp(-\gamma ' Z_1)}{h_0(x\exp(-\gamma' Z_2)) \exp(-\gamma ' Z_2)} = \frac{(a/b)\left(\frac{x \exp(-\gamma ' Z_1)}{b}\right)^{a-1}\exp(-\gamma ' Z_1)}{(a/b)\left(\frac{x \exp(-\gamma ' Z_2)}{b}\right)^{a-1}\exp(-\gamma ' Z_2)}  \quad \mbox{which is independent of time x}
\end{align}
</math>
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportional_hazards_model#Specifying_the_baseline_hazard_function Using the Weibull baseline hazard is the only circumstance under which the model satisfies both the proportional hazards, and accelerated failure time models]
* If X is exponential distribution with mean <math>b</math>, then X^(1/a) follows Weibull(a, b). See [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exponential_distribution Exponential distribution] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weibull_distribution Weibull distribution].
* [http://krex.k-state.edu/dspace/bitstream/handle/2097/8787/AngelaCrumer2011.pdf?sequence=3 Derivation] of mean and variance of Weibull distribution.
{| class="wikitable"
|-
! !! f(t)=h(t)*S(t) !! h(t) !! S(t) !! Mean
|-
| Exponential (Klein p37) || <math>\lambda \exp(-\lambda t)</math> || <math>\lambda</math> || <math>\exp(-\lambda t)</math> || <math>1/\lambda</math>
|-
| Weibull (Klein, Bender, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weibull_distribution#Alternative_parameterizations wikipedia]) || <math>p\lambda t^{p-1}\exp(-\lambda t^p)</math> || <math>p\lambda t^{p-1}</math> || <math>exp(-\lambda t^p)</math> || <math>\frac{\Gamma(1+1/p)}{\lambda^{1/p}}</math>
|-
| Exponential ([https://stat.ethz.ch/R-manual/R-devel/library/stats/html/Exponential.html R]) || <math>\lambda \exp(-\lambda t)</math>, <math>\lambda</math> is rate || <math>\lambda</math> || <math>\exp(-\lambda t)</math> || <math>1/\lambda</math>
|-
| Weibull ([https://stat.ethz.ch/R-manual/R-devel/library/stats/html/Weibull.html R], [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weibull_distribution wikipedia]) || <math>\frac{a}{b}\left(\frac{t}{b}\right)^{a-1} \exp(-(\frac{t}{b})^a)</math>,<br/><math>a</math> is shape, and <math>b</math> is scale || <math>\frac{a}{b}\left(\frac{t}{b}\right)^{a-1}</math> || <math>\exp(-(\frac{t}{b})^a)</math> || <math>b\Gamma(1+1/a)</math>
|}
* Accelerated failure-time model. Let <math>Y=\log(T)=\mu + \gamma'Z + \sigma W</math>. Then the survival function of <math>T</math> at the covariate Z,
: <math>
\begin{align}
S_T(t|Z) &= P(T > t |Z) \\
        &= P(Y > \ln t|Z) \\
        &= P(\mu + \sigma W > \ln t-\gamma' Z | Z) \\
        &= P(e^{\mu + \sigma W} > t\exp(-\gamma'Z) | Z) \\
        &= S_0(t \exp(-\gamma'Z)).
\end{align}
</math>
where <math>S_0(t)</math> denote the survival function T when Z=0. Since <math>h(t) = -\partial \ln (S(t))</math>, the hazard function of T with a covariate value Z is related to a baseline hazard rate <math>h_0</math> by (p56 Klein)
: <math>
\begin{align}
h(t|Z) = h_0(t\exp(-\gamma' Z)) \exp(-\gamma ' Z)
\end{align}
</math>
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
> mean(rexp(1000)^(1/2))
[1] 0.8902948
> mean(rweibull(1000, 2, 1))
[1] 0.8856265
> mean((rweibull(1000, 2, scale=4)/4)^2)
[1] 1.008923
</syntaxhighlight>
==== Graphical way to check Weibull, AFT, PH ====
http://stat.ethz.ch/education/semesters/ss2011/seminar/contents/handout_9.pdf#page=40
==== Weibull is related to Extreme value distribution ====
* [https://www.itl.nist.gov/div898/handbook/apr/section1/apr163.htm Log(Weibull) = Extreme value]
* [http://www.mathwave.com/articles/extreme-value-distributions.html Extreme Value Distributions] from mathwave.com
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generalized_extreme_value_distribution Generalized extreme value distribution] from wikipedia
* [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/EnvStats/versions/2.3.1/topics/EVD Density, distribution function, quantile function, and random generation for the (largest) extreme value distribution] from EnvStats R package
* [http://www.dataanalysisclassroom.com/lesson60/ Lesson 60 – Extreme value distributions in R]
==== Weibull distribution and bathtub ====
* https://rss.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1740-9713.2018.01177.x by John Crocker
* https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/materials-science/weibull-distribution
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bathtub_curve
=== CDF follows Unif(0,1) ===
https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/161635/why-is-the-cdf-of-a-sample-uniformly-distributed
Take the Exponential distribution for example
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
stem(pexp(rexp(1000)))
stem(pexp(rexp(10000)))
</syntaxhighlight>
Another example is from [https://github.com/faithghlee/SurvivalDataSimulation/blob/master/Simulation_Code.r simulating survival time]. Note that this is exactly [https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/sim.2059 Bender et al 2005] approach. See also the [https://cran.rstudio.com/web/packages/simsurv/index.html simsurv] (newer) and [https://cran.rstudio.com/web/packages/survsim/index.html survsim] (older) packages.
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
set.seed(100)
#Define the following parameters outlined in the step:
n = 1000
beta_0 = 0.5
beta_1 = -1
beta_2 = 1
b = 1.6 #This will be changed later as mentioned in Step 5 of documentation
#Step 1
x_1<-rbinom(n, 1, 0.25)
x_2<-rbinom(n, 1, 0.7)
#Step 2
U<-runif(n, 0,1)
T<-(-log(U)*exp(-(beta_0+beta_1*x_1+beta_2*x_2))) #Eqn (5)
Fn <- ecdf(T) # https://stat.ethz.ch/R-manual/R-devel/library/stats/html/ecdf.html
# verify F(T) or 1-F(T) ~ U(0, 1)
hist(Fn(T))
# look at the plot of survival probability vs time
plot(T, 1 - Fn(T))
</syntaxhighlight>
=== Simulate survival data ===
Note that status = 1 means an event (e.g. death) happened; Ti <= Ci. That is, the status variable used in R/Splus means the death indicator.
* http://www.bioconductor.org/packages/release/bioc/manuals/genefilter/man/genefilter.pdf#page=4
: <syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
y <- rexp(10)
cen <- runif(10)
status <- ifelse(cen < .7, 1, 0)
</syntaxhighlight>
* [http://www.ms.uky.edu/~mai/Rsurv.pdf#page=10 How much power/accuracy is lost by using the Cox model instead of Weibull model when both model are correct?] <math>h(t|x)=\lambda=e^{3x+1} = h_0(t)e^{\beta x}</math> where <math>h_0(t)=e^1, \beta=3</math>.
: '''Note that''' for the '''exponential''' distribution, larger rate/<math>\lambda</math> corresponds to a smaller mean. This relation matches with the Cox regression where a large covariate corresponds to a smaller survival time. So the coefficient 3 in myrates in the below example has the same sign as the coefficient (2.457466 for censored data) in the output of the Cox model fitting.
: <syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
n <- 30
x <- scale(1:n, TRUE, TRUE) # create covariates (standardized)
                            # the original example does not work on large 'n'
myrates <- exp(3*x+1)
set.seed(1234)
y <- rexp(n, rate = myrates) # generates the r.v.
cen <- rexp(n, rate = 0.5 )  #  E(cen)=1/rate
ycen <- pmin(y, cen)
di <- as.numeric(y <= cen)
survreg(Surv(ycen, di)~x, dist="weibull")$coef[2]  # -3.080125
coxph(Surv(ycen, di)~x)$coef  # 2.457466
# no censor
survreg(Surv(y,rep(1, n))~x,dist="weibull")$coef[2]  # -3.137603
survreg(Surv(y,rep(1, n))~x,dist="exponential")$coef[2]  # -3.143095
coxph(Surv(y,rep(1, n))~x)$coef  # 2.717794
# See the pdf note for the rest of code
</syntaxhighlight>
* Intercept in survreg for the exponential distribution. http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~madigan/W2025/notes/survival.pdf#page=25.
: <math>
\begin{align}
\lambda = exp(-intercept)
\end{align}
</math>
: <syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
> futime <- rexp(1000, 5)
> survreg(Surv(futime,rep(1,1000))~1,dist="exponential")$coef
(Intercept)
  -1.618263
> exp(1.618263)
[1] 5.044321
</syntaxhighlight>
* Intercept and scale in survreg for a Weibull distribution. http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~madigan/W2025/notes/survival.pdf#page=28.
: <math>
\begin{align}
\gamma &= 1/scale \\
  \alpha &= exp(-(Intercept)*\gamma)
\end{align}
</math>
: <syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
> survreg(Surv(futime,rep(1,1000))~1,dist="weibull")
Call:
survreg(formula = Surv(futime, rep(1, 1000)) ~ 1, dist = "weibull")
Coefficients:
(Intercept)
  -1.639469
Scale= 1.048049
Loglik(model)= 620.1  Loglik(intercept only)= 620.1
n= 1000
</syntaxhighlight>
* rsurv() function from the [https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/ipred/index.html ipred] package
* [http://people.stat.sfu.ca/~raltman/stat402/402L32.pdf#page=4 Use Weibull distribution to model survival data]. We assume the shape is constant across subjects.  We then allow the scale to vary across subjects. For subject <math>i</math> with covariate <math>X_i</math>, <math>\log(scale_i)</math> = <math>\beta ' X_i</math>. Note that if we want to make the <math>\beta</math> sign to be consistent with the Cox model, we want to use <math>\log(scale_i)</math> = <math>-\beta ' X_i</math> instead.
* http://sas-and-r.blogspot.com/2010/03/example-730-simulate-censored-survival.html. Assuming shape=1 in the Weibull distribution, then the [[#Weibull_and_Exponential_model_to_Cox_model|hazard function]] can be expressed as a proportional hazard model
: <math>
h(t|x) = 1/scale = \frac{1}{\lambda/e^{\beta 'x}} = \frac{e^{\beta ' x}}{\lambda} = h_0(t) \exp(\beta' x)
</math>
: <syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
n = 10000
beta1 = 2; beta2 = -1
lambdaT = .002 # baseline hazard
lambdaC = .004  # hazard of censoring
set.seed(1234)
x1 = rnorm(n,0)
x2 = rnorm(n,0)
# true event time
T = rweibull(n, shape=1, scale=lambdaT*exp(-beta1*x1-beta2*x2))
# No censoring
event2 <- rep(1, length(T))
coxph(Surv(T, event2)~ x1 + x2)
#      coef exp(coef) se(coef)    z      p
# x1  1.9982    7.3761  0.0188 106.1 <2e-16
# x2 -1.0020    0.3671  0.0127 -79.1 <2e-16
#
# Likelihood ratio test=15556  on 2 df, p=0
# n= 10000, number of events= 10000
# Censoring
C = rweibull(n, shape=1, scale=lambdaC)  #censoring time
time = pmin(T,C)  #observed time is min of censored and true
event = time==T  # set to 1 if event is observed
coxph(Surv(time, event)~ x1 + x2)
#      coef exp(coef) se(coef)    z      p
# x1  2.0104    7.4662  0.0225  89.3 <2e-16
# x2 -0.9921    0.3708  0.0155 -63.9 <2e-16
#
# Likelihood ratio test=11321  on 2 df, p=0
# n= 10000, number of events= 6002
</syntaxhighlight>
* https://stats.stackexchange.com/a/135129 (Bender's inverse probability method). Let <math>h_0(t)=\lambda \rho t^{\rho - 1} </math> where shape 𝜌>0 and scale 𝜆>0. Following the inverse probability method, a realisation of 𝑇∼𝑆(⋅|𝐱) is obtained by computing <math> t = \left( - \frac{\log(v)}{\lambda \exp(x' \beta)} \right) ^ {1/\rho} </math> with 𝑣 a uniform variate on (0,1). Using results on transformations of random variables, one may notice that 𝑇 has a conditional Weibull distribution (given 𝐱) with shape 𝜌 and scale 𝜆exp(𝐱′𝛽).
: <syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
# N = sample size   
# lambda = scale parameter in h0()
# rho = shape parameter in h0()
# beta = fixed effect parameter
# rateC = rate parameter of the exponential distribution of censoring variable C
simulWeib <- function(N, lambda, rho, beta, rateC)
{
  # covariate --> N Bernoulli trials
  x <- sample(x=c(0, 1), size=N, replace=TRUE, prob=c(0.5, 0.5))
  # Weibull latent event times
  v <- runif(n=N)
  Tlat <- (- log(v) / (lambda * exp(x * beta)))^(1 / rho)
  # censoring times
  C <- rexp(n=N, rate=rateC)
  # follow-up times and event indicators
  time <- pmin(Tlat, C)
  status <- as.numeric(Tlat <= C)
  # data set
  data.frame(id=1:N,
            time=time,
            status=status,
            x=x)
}
# Test
set.seed(1234)
betaHat <- rate <- rep(NA, 1e3)
for(k in 1:1e3)
{
  dat <- simulWeib(N=100, lambda=0.01, rho=1, beta=-0.6, rateC=0.001)
  fit <- coxph(Surv(time, status) ~ x, data=dat)
  rate[k] <- mean(dat$status == 0)
  betaHat[k] <- fit$coef
}
mean(rate)
# [1] 0.12287
mean(betaHat)
# [1] -0.6085473
</syntaxhighlight>
* [https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/sim.2059 Generating survival times to simulate Cox proportional hazards models] Bender et al 2005
** [https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/survsim/index.html survsim] package and the [https://www.jstatsoft.org/article/view/v059i02 paper] on JSS. See [http://justanotherdatablog.blogspot.com/2015/08/survival-analysis-1.html this post].
** [https://cran.rstudio.com/web/packages/simsurv/index.html simsurv] package (new, 2 vignettes).
** [https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/65005/get-a-desired-percentage-of-censored-observations-in-a-simulation-of-cox-ph-mode Get a desired percentage of censored observations in a simulation of Cox PH Model]. The answer is based on Bender et al 2005. [http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/sim.2059/epdf Generating survival times to simulate Cox proportional hazards models]. Statistics in Medicine 24: 1713–1723. The censoring time is fixed and the distribution of the censoring indicator is following the binomial. In fact, when we simulate survival data with a predefined censoring rate, we can pretend the survival time is already censored and only care about the censoring/status variable to make sure the censoring rate is controlled.
** (Search github) [https://github.com/faithghlee/SurvivalDataSimulation Using inverse CDF] <math> \lambda = exp(\beta' x), \; S(t)= \exp(-\lambda t) = \exp(-t e^{\beta' x}) \sim Unif(0,1) </math>
** [https://arxiv.org/pdf/1611.03063.pdf#page=17 Prediction Accuracy Measures for a Nonlinear Model and for Right-Censored Time-to-Event Data] Li and Wang
* [https://web.stanford.edu/~hastie/Papers/v39i05.pdf#page=8 Regularization paths for Cox's proportional hazards model via coordinate descent. J Stat Software] Simon et al 2011. [https://bmcbioinformatics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12859-019-2656-1#Sec8 Gsslasso Cox]: a Bayesian hierarchical model for predicting survival and detecting associated genes by incorporating pathway information by Tang 2019.
=== Predefined censoring rates ===
[http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/sim.7178/full Simulating survival data with predefined censoring rates for proportional hazards models]
=== Cross validation ===
* [http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/sim.4780122407/epdf Cross validation in survival analysis] by Verweij & van Houwelingen, Stat in medicine 1993.
* Using cross-validation to evaluate predictive accuracy of survival risk classifiers based on high-dimensional data. Simon et al, Brief Bioinform. 2011
=== Competing risk ===
* https://www.mailman.columbia.edu/research/population-health-methods/competing-risk-analysis
* Page 61 of Klein and Moeschberger "Survival Analysis"
=== [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survival_rate Survival rate] terminology ===
* [https://www.cancer.gov/publications/dictionaries/cancer-terms?cdrid=44023 Disease-free survival (DFS)]: the period after curative treatment ['''disease eliminated'''] when no disease can be detected
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progression-free_survival Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS)]. PFS is the length of time during and after the treatment of a disease, such as cancer, that a patient lives with the '''disease but it does not get worse'''. See an use at [https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/treatment/clinical-trials/nci-supported/nci-match NCI-MATCH] trial.
* Time to progression: The length of time from the date of diagnosis or the start of treatment for a disease until the disease starts to get worse or spread to other parts of the body. In a clinical trial, measuring the time to progression is one way to see how well a new treatment works. Also called TTP.
* Metastasis-free survival (MFS) time: the period until metastasis is detected
* [http://www.cancer.net/navigating-cancer-care/cancer-basics/understanding-statistics-used-guide-prognosis-and-evaluate-treatment Understanding Statistics Used to Guide Prognosis and Evaluate Treatment] (DFS & PFS rate)
=== Books ===
* [http://www.springer.com/us/book/9781441966452 Survival Analysis, A Self-Learning Text] by Kleinbaum, David G., Klein, Mitchel
* [http://www.springer.com/us/book/9783319312439 Applied Survival Analysis Using R] by Moore, Dirk F.
* [http://www.springer.com/us/book/9783319194240 Regression Modeling Strategies] by Harrell, Frank
* [http://www.springer.com/us/book/9781461413523 Regression Methods in Biostatistics] by Vittinghoff, E., Glidden, D.V., Shiboski, S.C., McCulloch, C.E.
* https://tbrieder.org/epidata/course_reading/e_tableman.pdf
* [https://www.wiley.com/en-us/Survival+Analysis%3A+Models+and+Applications-p-9780470977156 Survival Analysis: Models and Applications] by Xian Liu
=== HER2-positive breast cancer ===
* https://www.mayoclinic.org/breast-cancer/expert-answers/FAQ-20058066
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trastuzumab (antibody, injection into a vein or under the skin)
== [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportional_hazards_model Cox proportional hazards model] and the partial log-likelihood function ==
Let ''Y''<sub>''i''</sub> denote the observed time (either censoring time or event time) for subject ''i'', and let ''C''<sub>''i''</sub> be the indicator that the time corresponds to an event (i.e. if ''C''<sub>''i''</sub>&nbsp;=&nbsp;1 the event occurred and if ''C''<sub>''i''</sub>&nbsp;=&nbsp;0 the time is a censoring time).  The hazard function for the Cox proportional hazard model has the form
<math>
\lambda(t|X) = \lambda_0(t)\exp(\beta_1X_1 + \cdots + \beta_pX_p) = \lambda_0(t)\exp(X \beta^\prime).
</math>
This expression gives the hazard at time ''t'' for an individual with covariate vector (explanatory variables) ''X''. Based on this hazard function, a '''partial likelihood''' (defined on hazard function) can be constructed from the datasets as
<math>
L(\beta) = \prod\limits_{i:C_i=1}\frac{\theta_i}{\sum_{j:Y_j\ge Y_i}\theta_j},
</math>
where ''θ''<sub>''j''</sub>&nbsp;=&nbsp;exp(''X''<sub>''j'' </sub>''β''<sup>''′''</sup>) and ''X''<sub>1</sub>, ..., ''X''<sub>''n''</sub> are the covariate vectors for the ''n'' independently sampled individuals in the dataset (treated here as column vectors). [http://psfaculty.ucdavis.edu/bsjjones/coxslides.pdf This pdf] or [http://math.ucsd.edu/~rxu/math284/slect5.pdf#page=12 this note] give a toy example
The corresponding log partial likelihood is
<math>
\ell(\beta) = \sum_{i:C_i=1} \left(X_i \beta^\prime - \log \sum_{j:Y_j\ge Y_i}\theta_j\right).
</math>
This function can be maximized over ''β'' to produce maximum partial likelihood estimates of the model parameters.
The partial [[Score (statistics)|score function]] is
<math>
\ell^\prime(\beta) = \sum_{i:C_i=1} \left(X_i - \frac{\sum_{j:Y_j\ge Y_i}\theta_jX_j}{\sum_{j:Y_j\ge Y_i}\theta_j}\right),
</math>
and the [[Hessian matrix]] of the partial log likelihood is
<math>
\ell^{\prime\prime}(\beta) = -\sum_{i:C_i=1} \left(\frac{\sum_{j:Y_j\ge Y_i}\theta_jX_jX_j^\prime}{\sum_{j:Y_j\ge Y_i}\theta_j} - \frac{\sum_{j:Y_j\ge Y_i}\theta_jX_j\times \sum_{j:Y_j\ge Y_i}\theta_jX_j^\prime}{[\sum_{j:Y_j\ge Y_i}\theta_j]^2}\right).
</math>
Using this score function and Hessian matrix, the partial likelihood can be maximized using the [[Newton's method|Newton-Raphson]] algorithm. The inverse of the Hessian matrix, evaluated at the estimate of ''β'', can be used as an approximate variance-covariance matrix for the estimate, and used to produce approximate [[standard error]]s for the regression coefficients.
If X is age, then the coefficient is likely >0. If X is some treatment, then the coefficient is likely <0.
=== Compare the partial likelihood to the full likelihood ===
http://math.ucsd.edu/~rxu/math284/slect5.pdf#page=10
=== z-column (Wald statistic) from R's coxph() ===
* https://socialsciences.mcmaster.ca/jfox/Books/Companion/appendix/Appendix-Cox-Regression.pdf#page=6 The  ratio  of  each  regression  coefficient  to  its standard error, a Wald statistic which is asymptotically standard normal under the hypothesis that the corresponding β is 0.
* http://dni-institute.in/blogs/cox-regression-interpret-result-and-predict/
=== How exactly can the Cox-model ignore exact times? ===
[https://stats.stackexchange.com/q/94025 The Cox model does not depend on the times itself, instead it only needs an ordering of the events].
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
library(survival)
survfit(Surv(time, status) ~ x, data = aml)
fit <- coxph(Surv(time, status) ~ x, data = aml)
coef(fit) # 0.9155326
min(diff(sort(unique(aml$time)))) # 1
# Shift survival time for some obs but keeps the same order
# make sure we choose obs (n=20 not works but n=21 works) with twins
rbind(order(aml$time), sort(aml$time), aml$time[order(aml$time)])
# [,1] [,2] [,3] [,4] [,5] [,6] [,7] [,8] [,9] [,10] [,11] [,12] [,13] [,14] [,15] [,16]
# [1,]  12  13  14  15    1  16    2    3  17    4    5    18    19    6    20    7
# [2,]    5    5    8    8    9  12  13  13  16    18    23    23    27    28    30    31
# [3,]    5    5    8    8    9  12  13  13  16    18    23    23    27    28    30    31
# [,17] [,18] [,19] [,20] [,21] [,22] [,23]
# [1,]    21    8    22    9    23    10    11
# [2,]    33    34    43    45    45    48  161
# [3,]    33    34    43    45    45    48  161
aml$time2 <- aml$time
aml$time2[order(aml$time)[1:21]] <- aml$time[order(aml$time)[1:21]] - .9
fit2 <- coxph(Surv(time2, status) ~ x, data = aml); fit2
coef(fit2) #      0.9155326
coef(fit) == coef(fit2) # TRUE
aml$time3 <- aml$time
aml$time3[order(aml$time)[1:20]] <- aml$time[order(aml$time)[1:20]] - .9
fit3 <- coxph(Surv(time3, status) ~ x, data = aml); fit3
coef(fit3) #      0.8891567
coef(fit) == coef(fit3) # FALSE
</syntaxhighlight>
=== Partial likelihood when there are ties; hypothesis testing: Likelihood Ratio Test, Wald Test & Score Test ===
http://math.ucsd.edu/~rxu/math284/slect5.pdf#page=29
In R's coxph(): Nearly all Cox regression programs use the ''Breslow'' method by default, but not this one. The '' '''Efron approximation''' '' is used as the default here, it is more accurate when dealing with tied death times, and is as efficient computationally.
http://sfb649.wiwi.hu-berlin.de/fedc_homepage/xplore/tutorials/xaghtmlnode28.html (include the case when there is a partition of parameters). The formulas for 3 tests are also available on  Appendix B of Klein book.
The following code does not test for models. But since there is only one coefficient, the results are the same. If there is more than one variable, we can use anova(model1, model2) to run LRT.
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
library(KMsurv)
# No ties. Section 8.2
data(btrial)
str(btrial)
# 'data.frame': 45 obs. of  3 variables:
# $ time : int  19 25 30 34 37 46 47 51 56 57 ...
# $ death: int  1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ...
# $ im  : int  1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ...
table(subset(btrial, death == 1)$time)
# death time is unique
coxph(Surv(time, death) ~ im, data = btrial)
#    coef exp(coef) se(coef)    z    p
# im 0.980    2.665    0.435 2.25 0.024
# Likelihood ratio test=4.45  on 1 df, p=0.03
# n= 45, number of events= 24
# Ties, Section 8.3
data(kidney)
str(kidney)
# 'data.frame': 119 obs. of  3 variables:
# $ time : num  1.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 5.5 8.5 8.5 9.5 10.5 11.5 ...
# $ delta: int  1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ...
# $ type : int  1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ...
table(subset(kidney, delta == 1)$time)
# 0.5  1.5  2.5  3.5  4.5  5.5  6.5  8.5  9.5 10.5 11.5 15.5 16.5 18.5 23.5 26.5
# 6    1    2    2    2    1    1    2    1    1    1    2    1    1    1    1
# Default: Efron method
coxph(Surv(time, delta) ~ type, data = kidney)
# coef exp(coef) se(coef)    z    p
# type -0.613    0.542    0.398 -1.54 0.12
# Likelihood ratio test=2.41  on 1 df, p=0.1
# n= 119, number of events= 26
summary(coxph(Surv(time, delta) ~ type, data = kidney))
# n= 119, number of events= 26
# coef exp(coef) se(coef)      z Pr(>|z|)
# type -0.6126    0.5420  0.3979 -1.539    0.124
#
# exp(coef) exp(-coef) lower .95 upper .95
# type    0.542      1.845    0.2485    1.182
#
# Concordance= 0.497  (se = 0.056 )
# Rsquare= 0.02  (max possible= 0.827 )
# Likelihood ratio test= 2.41  on 1 df,  p=0.1
# Wald test            = 2.37  on 1 df,  p=0.1
# Score (logrank) test = 2.44  on 1 df,  p=0.1
# Breslow method
summary(coxph(Surv(time, delta) ~ type, data = kidney, ties = "breslow"))
# n= 119, number of events= 26
#        coef exp(coef) se(coef)      z Pr(>|z|)
# type -0.6182    0.5389  0.3981 -1.553    0.12
#
#      exp(coef) exp(-coef) lower .95 upper .95
# type    0.5389      1.856    0.247    1.176
#
# Concordance= 0.497  (se = 0.056 )
# Rsquare= 0.02  (max possible= 0.827 )
# Likelihood ratio test= 2.45  on 1 df,  p=0.1
# Wald test            = 2.41  on 1 df,  p=0.1
# Score (logrank) test = 2.49  on 1 df,  p=0.1
# Discrete/exact method
summary(coxph(Surv(time, delta) ~ type, data = kidney, ties = "exact"))
#        coef exp(coef) se(coef)      z Pr(>|z|)
# type -0.6294    0.5329  0.4019 -1.566    0.117
#
#      exp(coef) exp(-coef) lower .95 upper .95
# type    0.5329      1.877    0.2424    1.171
#
# Rsquare= 0.021  (max possible= 0.795 )
# Likelihood ratio test= 2.49  on 1 df,  p=0.1
# Wald test            = 2.45  on 1 df,  p=0.1
# Score (logrank) test = 2.53  on 1 df,  p=0.1
</syntaxhighlight>
=== Hazard (function) and survival function ===
A hazard is the rate at which events happen, so that the probability of an event happening in a short time interval is the length of time multiplied by the hazard.
<math>
h(t) = \lim_{\Delta t \to 0} \frac{P(t \leq T < t+\Delta t|T \geq t)}{\Delta t} = \frac{f(t)}{S(t)} = -\partial{ln[S(t)]}
</math>
Therefore
<math>
H(x) = \int_0^x h(u) d(u) = -ln[S(x)].
</math>
or
<math>
S(x) = e^{-H(x)}
</math>
Hazards (or probability of hazards) may vary with time, while the assumption in proportional hazard models for survival is that the hazard is a constant proportion.
Examples:
* If h(t)=c, S(t) is exponential. f(t) = c exp(-ct). The mean is 1/c.
* If <math>\log h(t) = c + \rho t</math>, S(t) is  Gompertz distribution.
* If <math>\log h(t)=c + \rho \log (t)</math>, S(t) is Weibull distribution.
* For Cox regression, the [http://www.math.ucsd.edu/~rxu/math284/slect6.pdf survival function can be shown] to be  <math>S(t|X) = S_0(t) ^ {\exp(X\beta)}</math>.
: <math>
\begin{align}
S(t|X) &= e^{-H(t)} = e^{-\int_0^t h(u|X)du} \\
  &= e^{-\int_0^t h_0(u) exp(X\beta) du} \\
  &= e^{-\int_0^t h_0(u) du \cdot exp(X \beta)} \\
  &= S_0(t)^{exp(X \beta)}
\end{align}
</math>
Alternatively,
: <math>
\begin{align}
S(t|X) &= e^{-H(t)} = e^{-\int_0^t h(u|X)du} \\
  &= e^{-\int_0^t h_0(u) exp(X\beta) du} \\
  &= e^{-H_0(t) \cdot exp(X \beta)}
\end{align}
</math>
where the cumulative baseline hazard at time t, <math>H_0(t)</math>, is commonly estimated through the non-parametric Breslow estimator.
=== Check the proportional hazard (constant HR over time) assumption by cox.zph() ===
* https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/survival/versions/2.41-2/topics/cox.zph
* http://rstudio-pubs-static.s3.amazonaws.com/5896_8f0fed2ccbbd42489276e554a05af87e.html
=== Sample size calculators ===
* [http://powerandsamplesize.com/Calculators/Test-Time-To-Event-Data/Cox-PH-Equivalence Calculate Sample Size Needed to Test Time-To-Event Data: Cox PH, Equivalence] including a reference
* http://www.sample-size.net/sample-size-survival-analysis/ including a reference
* [https://youtu.be/v18f-Jsqi4c?t=1309 Evolution of survival sample size methods] demonstrated by nQuery software. '''Sample size refers the number of events; status=1 (not the number of observations)'''
* http://www.icssc.org/Documents/AdvBiosGoa/Tab%2026.00_SurvSS.pdf no reference
* [https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/powerSurvEpi powerSurvEpi] R package
* [https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/NPHMC/index.html NPHMC] R package (based on the Proportional Hazards Mixture Cure Model) and the [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3859312/ paper]
* [http://r.789695.n4.nabble.com/Power-calculation-for-survival-analysis-td3830031.html Hmisc::cpower()] function.
==== How many events are required to fit the Cox regression reliably? ====
If we have only 1 covariate and the covariate is continuous, we need at least 2 events (one for the baseline hazard and one for beta).
If the covariate is discrete, we need at least one event from (each of) two groups in order to fit the Cox regression reliably. For example, if status=(0,0,0,1,0,1) and x=(0,0,1,1,2,2) works fine.
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
library(survival)
head(ovarian)
#  futime fustat    age resid.ds rx ecog.ps
# 1    59      1 72.3315        2  1      1
# 2    115      1 74.4932        2  1      1
# 3    156      1 66.4658        2  1      2
# 4    421      0 53.3644        2  2      1
# 5    431      1 50.3397        2  1      1
# 6    448      0 56.4301        1  1      2
ova <- ovarian # n=26
ova$time <- ova$futime
ova$status <- 0
ova$status[1:4] <- 1
coxph(Surv(time, status) ~ rx, data = ova) # OK
summary(survfit(Surv(time, status) ~ rx, data =ova))
#                rx=1
#  time n.risk n.event survival std.err lower 95% CI upper 95% CI
#    59    13      1    0.923  0.0739        0.789            1
#  115    12      1    0.846  0.1001        0.671            1
#  156    11      1    0.769  0.1169        0.571            1
#                rx=2
#    time  n.risk  n.event  survival  std.err lower 95% CI upper 95% CI
# 421.0000 10.0000  1.0000    0.9000  0.0949      0.7320      1.0000
# Suspicious Cox regression result due to 0 sample size in one group
ova$status <- 0
ova$status[1:3] <- 1
coxph(Surv(time, status) ~ rx, data = ova)
#        coef exp(coef)  se(coef) z p
# rx -2.13e+01  5.67e-10  2.32e+04 0 1
#
# Likelihood ratio test=4.41  on 1 df, p=0.04
# n= 26, number of events= 3
# Warning message:
# In fitter(X, Y, strats, offset, init, control, weights = weights,  :
#  Loglik converged before variable  1 ; beta may be infinite.
summary(survfit(Surv(time, status) ~ rx, data = ova))
#                rx=1
# time n.risk n.event survival std.err lower 95% CI upper 95% CI
#  59    13      1    0.923  0.0739        0.789            1
#  115    12      1    0.846  0.1001        0.671            1
#  156    11      1    0.769  0.1169        0.571            1
#                rx=2
# time n.risk n.event survival std.err lower 95% CI upper 95% CI
</syntaxhighlight>
=== Extract p-values ===
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
fit <- coxph(Surv(futime, fustat) ~ age, data = ovarian)
# method 1:
beta <- coef(fit)
se <- sqrt(diag(vcov(fit)))
1 - pchisq((beta/se)^2, 1)
# method 2: https://www.biostars.org/p/65315/
coef(summary(fit))[, "Pr(>|z|)"]
</syntaxhighlight>
=== Expectation of life & expected future lifetime ===
* The average lifetime is the same as the area under the survival curve.
: <math>
\begin{align}
\mu &= \int_0^\infty t f(t) dt \\
  &= \int_0^\infty S(t) dt
\end{align}
</math>
by integrating by parts making use of the fact that -f(t) is the derivative of S(t), which has limits S(0)=1 and <math>S(\infty)=0</math>. [https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/186497/calculating-life-time-expectancy The average lifetime may not be bounded] if you have censored data, there's censored observations that last beyond your last recorded death.
* The [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survival_analysis#Quantities_derived_from_the_survival_distribution expected future lifetime at a given time <math>t_0</math>]
:<math>\frac{1}{S(t_0)} \int_0^{\infty} t\,f(t_0+t)\,dt = \frac{1}{S(t_0)} \int_{t_0}^{\infty} S(t)\,dt,</math>
=== Hazard Ratio vs Relative Risk ===
# '''Hazard''' represents the '''instantaneous event rate''', which means the probability that an individual would experience an event (e.g. death/relapse) at a particular given point in time after the intervention, assuming that this individual has survived to that particular point of time without experiencing any event.
# '''Hazard ratio''' is a measure of '''an effect''' of '''an intervention''' of '''an outcome''' of interest over time.
# Hazard ratio = hazard in the intervention group / Hazard in the control group
# A hazard ratio is often reported as a “reduction in risk of death or progression” – This '''risk reduction''' is calculated as '''1 minus the Hazard Ratio (exp^beta)''', e.g., HR of 0.84 is equal to a 16% reduction in risk. See [http://www.time4epi.com/docs/default-source/default-document-library/insight07_understandinghazardratios.pdf?sfvrsn=2 www.time4epi.com] and [http://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/70741/how-to-interpret-a-hazard-ratio-from-a-continuous-variable-unit-of-difference stackexchange.com].
# Hazard ratio and its confidence can be obtained in R by using the '''summary()''' method; e.g. '''fit <- coxph(Surv(time, status) ~ x); summary(fit)$conf.int; confint(fit)'''
# The coefficient beta represents the expected change in '''log hazard''' if X changes by one unit and all other variables are held constant in Cox models. See [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5969114/ Variable selection – A review and recommendations for the practicing statistician] by Heinze et al 2018.
Another [https://socialsciences.mcmaster.ca/jfox/Books/Companion-1E/appendix-cox-regression.pdf example] (John Fox, Cox Proportional-Hazards Regression for Survival Data) is assuming Y ~ age + prio + others.
* If exp(beta_age) = 0.944. It means an additional year of age '''reduces the hazard by a factor''' of .944 on average, or (1-.944)*100 = 5.6 '''percent'''.
* If exp(beta_prio) = 1.096, it means each prior conviction '''increases the hazard by a factor''' of 1.096, or 9.6 '''percent'''.
[https://www.quora.com/How-do-you-explain-the-difference-between-hazard-ratio-and-relative-risk-to-a-layman How do you explain the difference between hazard ratio and '''relative risk''' to a layman?] from Quora.
[https://www.stat-d.si/mz/mz13.1/p4.pdf Odds Ratio, Hazard Ratio and Relative Risk] by Janez Stare
For two groups that differ only in treatment condition, the ratio of the hazard functions is given by <math>e^\beta</math>, where <math>\beta</math> is the estimate of treatment effect derived from the regression model. See [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hazard_ratio#Definition_and_derivation here].
[http://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/26408/what-is-the-difference-between-a-hazard-ratio-and-the-ecoef-of-a-cox-equation?rq=1 Compute ratio ratios from coxph()] in R (Hint: exp(beta)).
'''Prognostic index''' is defined on http://www.math.ucsd.edu/~rxu/math284/slect6.pdf#page=2.
[http://www.sthda.com/english/wiki/cox-proportional-hazards-model#basics-of-the-cox-proportional-hazards-model Basics of the Cox proportional hazards model]. Good prognostic factor (b<0 or HR<1) and bad prognostic factor (b>0 or HR>1).
Variable selection: variables were retained in the prediction models if they had a hazard ratio of <0.85 or >1.15 (for binary variables) and were statistically significant at the 0.01 level. see [http://www.bmj.com/content/357/bmj.j2497 Development and validation of risk prediction equations to estimate survival in patients with colorectal cancer: cohort study].
==== Hazard Ratio and death probability ====
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hazard_ratio#The_hazard_ratio_and_survival
Suppose ''S''<sub>0</sub>(t)=.2 (20% survived at time t) and the hazard ratio (hr) is 2 (a group has twice the chance of dying than a comparison group), then (Cox model is assumed)
# ''S''<sub>1</sub>(t)=''S''<sub>0</sub>(t)<sup>hr</sup> = .2<sup>2</sup> = .04 (4% survived at t)
# The corresponding death probabilities are 0.8 and 0.96.
#  If a subject is exposed to twice the risk of a reference subject at every age, then the probability that the subject will be alive at any given age is the square of the probability that the reference subject (covariates = 0) would be alive at the same age. See [http://data.princeton.edu/pop509/ParametricSurvival.pdf#page=10 p10 of this lecture notes].
# exp(x*beta) is the relative risk associated with covariate value x.
==== Hazard Ratio Forest Plot ====
The forest plot quickly summarizes the hazard ratio data across multiple variables –If the line crosses the 1.0 value, the hazard ratio is not significant and there is no clear advantage for either arm.
=== Piece-wise constant baseline hazard model, Poisson model and Breslow estimate ===
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportional_hazards_model#Relationship_to_Poisson_models
* http://data.princeton.edu/wws509/notes/c7s4.html
* It has been implemented in the biospear package ([https://github.com/cran/biospear/blob/master/R/poissonize.R poissonize.R]) with the 'grplasso' package for group-lasso method. ''We implemented a Poisson model over two-month intervals, corresponding to a piecewise constant hazard model which approximates rather well the Breslow estimator in the Cox model''.
* http://r.789695.n4.nabble.com/exponential-proportional-hazard-model-td805536.html
* https://www.demogr.mpg.de/papers/technicalreports/tr-2010-003.pdf
* [https://stats.stackexchange.com/q/8117 Does Cox Regression have an underlying Poisson distribution?]
** [https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/115479/calculate-incidence-rates-using-poisson-model-relation-to-hazard-ratio-from-cox/116083#116083 Calculate incidence rates using poisson model: relation to hazard ratio from Cox PH model] R code verification is included.
* https://rdrr.io/cran/JM/man/piecewiseExp.ph.html
* https://rdrr.io/cran/pch/man/pchreg.html
* [https://statmd.wordpress.com/2012/10/05/survival-analysis-via-hazard-based-modeling-and-generalized-linear-models/ Survival Analysis via Hazard Based Modeling and Generalized Linear Models]
* https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/mgcv/versions/1.8-23/topics/cox.pht
=== Estimate baseline hazard <math>h_0(t)</math>, Breslow cumulative baseline hazard <math>H_0(t)</math>, baseline survival function <math>S_0(t)</math> and the survival function <math>S(t)</math> ===
Google: how to estimate baseline hazard rate
* survfit.object has print(), plot(), lines(), and points() methods. It returns a list with components
** n
** time
** n.risk
** n.event
** n.censor
** surv [S_0(t)]
** cumhaz [ same as -log(surv)]
** upper
** lower
** n.all
* Terry Therneau: [http://r.789695.n4.nabble.com/Is-the-output-of-survfit-coxph-survival-or-baseline-survival-td3861919.html The ''baseline survival'', which is the survival for a hypothetical subject with all covariates=0, may be useful mathematical shorthand when writing a book but I cannot think of a single case where the resulting curve would be of any practical interest in medical data.]
* http://www.math.ucsd.edu/~rxu/math284/slect6.pdf#page=4 '''Breslow''' Estimator for '''cumulative''' baseline hazard at a time t and '''Kalbfleisch/Prentice''' Estimator
* When there are no covariates, the Breslow’s estimate reduces to the Fleming-Harrington (Nelson-Aalen) estimate, and K/P reduces to KM.
* [http://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/68737/how-to-estimate-baseline-hazard-function-in-cox-model-with-r stackexchange.com] and [https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/36015/prediction-in-cox-regression/36077#36077 '''cumulative''' and non-cumulative baseline hazard]
* [http://grokbase.com/t/r/r-help/012p93znnh/r-newbie-cox-baseline-hazard (newbie) Cox Baseline Hazard] ''There are two methods of calculating the baseline survival, the default one gives the baseline hazard estimator you want. It is attributed to Aalen, Breslow, or Peto (see the next item).'' An example: https://stats.idre.ucla.edu/r/examples/asa/r-applied-survival-analysis-ch-2/.
* [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/survival/versions/2.41-2/topics/survfit.coxph survfit.coxph](formula, newdata, type, ...)
** newdata: '''Default is the mean of the covariates used in the coxph fit'''
** type = "aalen", "efron", or "kalbfleisch-prentice". The default is to match the computation used in the Cox model. The Nelson-Aalen-Breslow estimate for ties='breslow', the Efron estimate for ties='efron' and the Kalbfleisch-Prentice estimate for a discrete time model ties='exact'. Variance estimates are the Aalen-Link-Tsiatis, Efron, and Greenwood. The default will be the Efron estimate for ties='efron' and the '''Aalen estimate''' otherwise.
* [http://grokbase.com/t/r/r-help/04a5ydyst0/r-nelson-aalen-estimator-in-r Nelson-Aalen estimator in R]. The easiest way to get the Nelson-Aalen estimator is
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
basehaz(coxph(Surv(time,status)~1,data=aml))
</syntaxhighlight>
because the (Breslow) hazard estimator for a Cox model reduces to the Nelson-Aalen estimator when there are no covariates. You can also compute it from information returned by survfit().
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
fit <- survfit(Surv(time, status) ~ 1, data = aml)
cumsum(fit$n.event/fit$n.risk) # the Nelson-Aalen estimator for the times given by fit$times
-log(fit$surv)  # cumulative hazard
</syntaxhighlight>
==== Manually compute ====
'''Breslow estimator of the baseline cumulative hazard rate''' reduces to the '''Nelson-Aalen''' estimator <math>\sum_{t_i \le t} \frac{d_i}{Y_i}</math> (<math>Y_i</math> is the number at risk at time <math>t_i</math>) when there are no covariates present; see p283 of Klein 2003.
: <math>
\begin{align}
\hat{H}_0(t) &= \sum_{t_i \le t} \frac{d_i}{W(t_i;b)}, \\
W(t_i;b) &= \sum_{j \in R(t_i)} \exp(b' z_j)
\end{align}
</math>
where <math> t_1 < t_2 < \cdots < t_D</math> denotes the distinct death times and <math>d_i</math> be the number of deaths at time <math>t_i</math>. The estimator of the baseline survival function <math>S_0(t) = \exp [-H_0(t)]</math> is given by <math>\hat{S}_0(t) = \exp [-\hat{H}_0(t)]</math>. Below we use the formula to compute the cumulative hazard (and survival function) and compare them with the result obtained using R's built-in functions. The following code is a modification of the snippet from the post [https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/46532/cox-baseline-hazard Breslow cumulative hazard and basehaz()].
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
bhaz <- function(beta, time, status, x) {
  # time can be duplicated
  # x (covariate) must be continuous
  data <- data.frame(time,status,x)
  data <- data[order(data$time), ]
  dt  <- unique(data$time)
  k    <- length(dt)
  risk <- exp(data.matrix(data[,-c(1:2)]) %*% beta)
  h    <- rep(0,k)
 
  for(i in 1:k) {
    h[i] <- sum(data$status[data$time==dt[i]]) / sum(risk[data$time>=dt[i]])         
  }
 
  return(data.frame(h, dt))
}
# Example 1 'ovarian' which has unique survival time
all(table(ovarian$futime) == 1) # TRUE
fit <- coxph(Surv(futime, fustat) ~ age, data = ovarian)
# 1. compute the cumulative baseline hazard
# 1.1 manually using Breslow estimator at the observed time
h0 <- bhaz(fit$coef, ovarian$futime, ovarian$fustat, ovarian$age)
H0 <- cumsum(h0$h)
# 1.2 use basehaz (always compute at the observed time)
# since we consider the baseline, we need to use centered=FALSE
H0.bh <- basehaz(fit, centered = FALSE)
cbind(H0, h0$dt, H0.bh)
range(abs(H0 - H0.bh$hazard)) # [1] 6.352747e-22 5.421011e-20
# 2. compute the estimation of the survival function
# 2.1 manually using Breslow estimator at t = observed time (one dim, sorted)
#    and observed age (another dim):
# S(t) = S0(t) ^ exp(bx) = exp(-H0(t)) ^ exp(bx)
S1 <- outer(exp(-H0),  exp(coef(fit) * ovarian$age), "^")
dim(S1) # row = times, col = age
# 2.2 How about considering times not at observed (e.g. h0$dt - 10)?
# Let's look at the hazard rate
newtime <- h0$dt - 10
H0 <- sapply(newtime, function(tt) sum(h0$h[h0$dt <= tt]))
S2 <- outer(exp(-H0),  exp(coef(fit) * ovarian$age), "^")
dim(S2) # row = newtime, col = age
# 2.3 use summary() and survfit() to obtain the estimation of the survival
S3 <- summary(survfit(fit, data.frame(age = ovarian$age)), times = h0$dt)$surv
dim(S3)  # row = times, col = age
range(abs(S1 - S3)) # [1] 2.117244e-17 6.544321e-12
# 2.4 How about considering times not at observed (e.g. h0$dt - 10)?
# Note that we cannot put times larger than the observed
S4 <- summary(survfit(fit, data.frame(age = ovarian$age)), times = newtime)$surv
range(abs(S2 - S4)) # [1] 0.000000e+00 6.544321e-12
</syntaxhighlight>
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
# Example 2 'kidney' which has duplicated time
fit <- coxph(Surv(time, status) ~ age, data = kidney)
# manually compute the breslow cumulative baseline hazard
#  at the observed time
h0 <- with(kidney, bhaz(fit$coef, time, status, age))
H0 <- cumsum(h0$h)
# use basehaz (always compute at the observed time)
# since we consider the baseline, we need to use centered=FALSE
H0.bh <- basehaz(fit, centered = FALSE)
head(cbind(H0, h0$dt, H0.bh))
range(abs(H0 - H0.bh$hazard)) # [1] 0.000000000 0.005775414
# manually compute the estimation of the survival function
# at t = observed time (one dim, sorted) and observed age (another dim):
# S(t) = S0(t) ^ exp(bx) = exp(-H0(t)) ^ exp(bx)
S1 <- outer(exp(-H0),  exp(coef(fit) * kidney$age), "^")
dim(S1) # row = times, col = age
# How about considering times not at observed (h0$dt - 1)?
# Let's look at the hazard rate
newtime <- h0$dt - 1
H0 <- sapply(newtime, function(tt) sum(h0$h[h0$dt <= tt]))
S2 <- outer(exp(-H0),  exp(coef(fit) * kidney$age), "^")
dim(S2) # row = newtime, col = age
# use summary() and survfit() to obtain the estimation of the survival
S3 <- summary(survfit(fit, data.frame(age = kidney$age)), times = h0$dt)$surv
dim(S3)  # row = times, col = age
range(abs(S1 - S3)) # [1] 0.000000000 0.002783715
# How about considering times not at observed (h0$dt - 1)?
# We cannot put times larger than the observed
S4 <- summary(survfit(fit, data.frame(age = kidney$age)), times = newtime)$surv
range(abs(S2 - S4)) # [1] 0.000000000 0.002783715
</syntaxhighlight>
* [https://stat.ethz.ch/R-manual/R-devel/library/survival/html/basehaz.html basehaz()] (an alias for survfit) from [http://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/25317/how-to-calculate-predicted-hazard-rates-from-a-cox-ph-model stackexchange.com] and [http://r.789695.n4.nabble.com/breslow-estimator-for-cumulative-hazard-function-td795277.html here]. basehaz() has a parameter ''centered'' which by default is TRUE. Actually basehaz() gives '''cumulative hazard H(t)'''. See [http://r.789695.n4.nabble.com/Baseline-survival-estimate-td965389.html here]. That is, exp(-basehaz(fit)$hazard) is the same as summary(survfit(fit))$surv. basehaz() function is not useful.
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
fit <- coxph(Surv(futime, fustat) ~ age, data = ovarian)
> fit
Call:
coxph(formula = Surv(futime, fustat) ~ age, data = ovarian)
      coef exp(coef) se(coef)    z      p
age 0.1616    1.1754  0.0497 3.25 0.0012
Likelihood ratio test=14.3  on 1 df, p=0.000156
n= 26, number of events= 12
# Note the default 'centered = TRUE' for basehaz()
> exp(-basehaz(fit)$hazard) # exp(-cumulative hazard)
[1] 0.9880206 0.9738738 0.9545899 0.9334790 0.8973620 0.8624781 0.8243117
[8] 0.8243117 0.8243117 0.7750981 0.7750981 0.7244924 0.6734146 0.6734146
[15] 0.5962187 0.5204807 0.5204807 0.5204807 0.5204807 0.5204807 0.5204807
[22] 0.5204807 0.5204807 0.5204807 0.5204807 0.5204807
> dim(ovarian)
[1] 26  6
> exp(-basehaz(fit)$hazard)[ovarian$fustat == 1]
[1] 0.9880206 0.9738738 0.9545899 0.8973620 0.8243117 0.8243117 0.7750981
[8] 0.7750981 0.5204807 0.5204807 0.5204807 0.5204807
> summary(survfit(fit))$surv
[1] 0.9880206 0.9738738 0.9545899 0.9334790 0.8973620 0.8624781 0.8243117
[8] 0.7750981 0.7244924 0.6734146 0.5962187 0.5204807
> summary(survfit(fit, data.frame(age=mean(ovarian$age))),
          time=ovarian$futime[ovarian$fustat == 1])$surv
# Same result as above
> summary(survfit(fit, data.frame(age=mean(ovarian$age))),
                    time=ovarian$futime)$surv
[1] 0.9880206 0.9738738 0.9545899 0.9334790 0.8973620 0.8624781 0.8243117
[8] 0.8243117 0.8243117 0.7750981 0.7750981 0.7244924 0.6734146 0.6734146
[15] 0.5962187 0.5204807 0.5204807 0.5204807 0.5204807 0.5204807 0.5204807
[22] 0.5204807 0.5204807 0.5204807 0.5204807 0.5204807
</syntaxhighlight>
=== Predicted survival probability in Cox model: survfit.coxph(), plot.survfit() & summary.survfit( , times) ===
For theory, see section 8.6 Estimation of the survival function in Klein & Moeschberger.
For R, see [https://stackoverflow.com/questions/26641178/extract-survival-probabilities-in-survfit-by-groups Extract survival probabilities in Survfit by groups]
[https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/survival/versions/2.41-2/topics/plot.survfit plot.survfit()]. fun="log" to plot log survival curve, fun="event" plot cumulative events, fun="cumhaz" plots cumulative hazard (f(y) = -log(y)).
The plot function below will draw 4 curves: <math>S_0(t)^{\exp(\hat{\beta}_{age}*60)}</math>, <math>S_0(t)^{\exp(\hat{\beta}_{age}*60+\hat{\beta}_{stageII})}</math>, <math>S_0(t)^{\exp(\hat{\beta}_{age}*60+\hat{\beta}_{stageIII})}</math>, <math>S_0(t)^{\exp(\hat{\beta}_{age}*60+\hat{\beta}_{stageIV})}</math>.
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
library(KMsurv) # Data package for Klein & Moeschberge
data(larynx)
larynx$stage <- factor(larynx$stage)
coxobj <- coxph(Surv(time, delta) ~ age + stage, data = larynx)
# Figure 8.3 from Section 8.6
plot(survfit(coxobj, newdata = data.frame(age=rep(60, 4), stage=factor(1:4))), lty = 1:4)
# Estimated probability for a 60-year old for different stage patients
out <- summary(survfit(coxobj, data.frame(age = rep(60, 4), stage=factor(1:4))), times = 5)
out$surv
#  time n.risk n.event survival1 survival2 survival3 survival4
#    5    34      40    0.702    0.665      0.51    0.142
sum(larynx$time >=5) # n.risk
# [1] 34
sum(larynx$delta[larynx$time <=5]) # n.event
# [1] 40
sum(larynx$time >5) # Wrong
# [1] 31
sum(larynx$delta[larynx$time <5]) # Wrong
# [1] 39
# 95% confidence interval
out$lower
# 0.8629482 0.9102532 0.7352413 0.548579
out$upper
# 0.5707952 0.4864903 0.3539527 0.03691768
</syntaxhighlight>
We need to pay attention when the number of covariates is large (and we don't want to specify each covariates in the formula). The key is to create a data frame and use dot (.) in the formula. This is to fix a warning message: '' 'newdata' had XXX rows but variables found have YYY rows'' from running '''survfit(, newdata)'''.
Another way is to use [https://stackoverflow.com/questions/25313897/r-survival-analysis-coxph-call-multiple-column as.formula()] if we don't want to create a new object.
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
xsub <- data.frame(xtrain)
colnames(xsub) <- paste0("x", 1:ncol(xsub))
coxobj <- coxph(Surv(ytrain[, "time"], ytrain[, "status"]) ~ ., data = xsub)
newdata <- data.frame(xtest)
colnames(newdata) <- paste0("x", 1:ncol(newdata))
survprob <- summary(survfit(coxobj, newdata=newdata),
                    times = 5)$surv[1, ] 
# since there is only 1 time point, we select the first row in surv (surv is a matrix with one row).
</syntaxhighlight>
The [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/pec/versions/2018.07.26/topics/predictSurvProb predictSurvProb()] function from the [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/pec/versions/2018.07.26 pec] package can also be used to extract survival probability predictions from various modeling approaches.
==== Predicted survival probabilities from glmnet: c060/peperr, biospear packages and manual computation ====
* Terry Therneau: [http://r.789695.n4.nabble.com/Predict-in-glmnet-for-cox-family-td4706070.html The answer is that you cannot predict survival time, in general]
* https://rdrr.io/cran/c060/man/predictProb.glmnet.html
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
## S3 method for class 'glmnet'
predictProb(object, response, x, times, complexity, ...)
set.seed(1234)
junk <- biospear::simdata(n=500, p=500, q.main = 10, q.inter = 0,
                  prob.tt = .5, m0=1, alpha.tt=0,
                  beta.main= -.5, b.corr = .7, b.corr.by=25,
                  wei.shape = 1, recr=3, fu=2, timefactor=1)
summary(junk$time)
library(glmnet)
library(c060) # Error: object 'predictProb' not found
library(peperr)
y <- cbind(time=junk$time, status=junk$status)
x <- cbind(1, junk[, "treat", drop = FALSE])
names(x) <- c("inter", "treat")
x <- as.matrix(x)
cvfit <- cv.glmnet(x, y, family = "cox")
obj <- glmnet(x, y, family = "cox")
xnew <- matrix(c(0,0), nr=1)
predictProb(obj, y, xnew, times=1, complexity = cvfit$lambda.min)
# Error in exp(lp[response[, 1] >= t.unique[i]]) :
#  non-numeric argument to mathematical function
# In addition: Warning message:
# In is.na(x) : is.na() applied to non-(list or vector) of type 'NULL'
</syntaxhighlight>
* https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/biospear/versions/1.0.1/topics/expSurv and manual computation (search bhaz)
<pre>
expSurv(res, traindata, method, ci.level = .95, boot = FALSE, nboot, smooth = TRUE,
  pct.group = 4, time, trace = TRUE, ncores = 1)
# S3 method for resexpSurv
predict(object, newdata, ...)
</pre>
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
# continue the example
# BMsel() takes a little while
resBM <- biospear::BMsel(
    data = junk,
    method = "lasso",
    inter = FALSE,
    folds = 5)
 
# Note: if we specify time =5 in expsurv(), we will get an error message
# 'time' is out of the range of the observed survival time.
# Note: if we try to specify more than 1 time point, we will get the following msg
# 'time' must be an unique value; no two values are allowed.
esurv <- biospear::expSurv(
    res = resBM,
    traindata = junk,
    boot = FALSE,
    time = median(junk$time),
    trace = TRUE)
# debug(biospear:::plot.resexpSurv)
plot(esurv, method = "lasso")
# This is equivalent to doing the following
xx <- attributes(esurv)$m.score[, "lasso"]
wc <- order(xx); wgr <- 1:nrow(esurv$surv)
p1 <- plot(x = xx[wc], y = esurv$surv[wgr, "lasso"][wc],
          xlab='prognostic score', ylab='survival prob')
# prognostic score beta*x in this cases.
# ignore treatment effect and interactions
xxmy <- as.vector(as.matrix(junk[, names(resBM$lasso)]) %*% resBM$lasso)
# See page4 of the paper. Scaled scores were used in the plot
range(abs(xx - (xxmy-quantile(xxmy, .025)) / (quantile(xxmy, .975) -  quantile(xxmy, .025))))
# [1] 1.500431e-09 1.465241e-06
h0 <- bhaz(resBM$lasso, junk$time, junk$status, junk[, names(resBM$lasso)])
newtime <- median(junk$time)
H0 <- sapply(newtime, function(tt) sum(h0$h[h0$dt <= tt]))
# newx <- junk[ , names(resBM$lasso)]
# Compute the estimate of the survival probability at training x and time = median(junk$time)
# using Breslow method
S2 <- outer(exp(-H0),  exp(xxmy), "^") # row = newtime, col = newx
range(abs(esurv$surv[wgr, "lasso"] - S2))
# [1] 6.455479e-18 2.459136e-06
# My implementation of the prognostic plot
#  Note that the x-axis on the plot is based on prognostic scores beta*x,
#  not on treatment modifying scores gamma*x as described in the paper.
#  Maybe it is because inter = FALSE in BMsel() we have used.
p2 <- plot(xxmy[wc], S2[wc], xlab='prognostic score', ylab='survival prob')  # cf p1
> names(esurv)
[1] "surv"  "lower" "upper"
> str(esurv$surv)
num [1:500, 1:2] 0.772 0.886 0.961 0.731 0.749 ...
- attr(*, "dimnames")=List of 2
  ..$ : NULL
  ..$ : chr [1:2] "lasso" "oracle"
esurv2 <- predict(esurv, newdata = junk)
esurv2$surv      # All zeros?
</syntaxhighlight>
Bug from the sample data (interaction was considered here; inter = TRUE) ?
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
set.seed(123456)
resBM <-  BMsel(
  data = Breast,
  x = 4:ncol(Breast),
  y = 2:1,
  tt = 3,
  inter = TRUE,
  std.x = TRUE,
  folds = 5,
  method = c("lasso", "lasso-pcvl"))
esurv <- expSurv(
  res = resBM,
  traindata = Breast,
  boot = FALSE,
  smooth = TRUE,
  time = 4,
  trace = TRUE
)
Computation of the expected survival
Computation of analytical confidence intervals
Computation of smoothed B-splines
Error in cobs(x = x, y = y, print.mesg = F, print.warn = F, method = "uniform",  :
  There is at least one pair of adjacent knots that contains no observation.
</syntaxhighlight>
=== Loglikelihood ===
* fit$loglik is a vector of length 2 (Null model, fitted model)
* Use '''survival::anova()''' command to do a likelihood ratio test. Note this function does not work on ''glmnet'' object.
* [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/survival/versions/2.41-2/topics/residuals.coxph residuals.coxph] Calculates martingale, deviance, score or Schoenfeld residuals for a Cox proportional hazards model.
* No deviance() on coxph object!
* [https://stat.ethz.ch/R-manual/R-devel/library/survival/html/logLik.coxph.html logLik()] function will return fit$loglik[2]
==== Get the partial likelihood of a Cox PH Model with new data ====
offset was used. See https://stackoverflow.com/questions/26721551/is-there-a-way-to-get-the-partial-likelihood-of-a-cox-ph-model-with-new-data-and
==== glmnet ====
* It seems AIC does not require the assumption of nested models.
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akaike_information_criterion, ([https://forvo.com/word/akaike/ akaike pronunciation in Japanese])
:<math>
\begin{align}
\mathrm{AIC} &= 2k - 2\ln(\hat L) \\
\mathrm{AICc} &= \mathrm{AIC} + \frac{2k^2 + 2k}{n - k - 1}
\end{align}
</math>
* [https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/25817/is-it-possible-to-calculate-aic-and-bic-for-lasso-regression-models Is it possible to calculate AIC and BIC for lasso regression models?]. See the references about the degrees of freedom in Lasso regressions.
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
fit <- glmnet(x, y, family = "multinomial")
tLL <- fit$nulldev - deviance(fit) # ln(L)
k <- fit$df
n <- fit$nobs
AICc <- -tLL+2*k+2*k*(k+1)/(n-k-1)
AICc
</syntaxhighlight>
* For ''glmnet'' object, see [https://rdrr.io/cran/glmnet/man/deviance.glmnet.html ?deviance.glmnet] and [https://stackoverflow.com/questions/40920051/r-getting-aic-bic-likelihood-from-glmnet R: Getting AIC/BIC/Likelihood from GLMNet]. An example with all continuous variables
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
set.seed(10101)
N=1000;p=6
nzc=p/3
x=matrix(rnorm(N*p),N,p)
beta=rnorm(nzc)
fx=x[,seq(nzc)]%*%beta/3
hx=exp(fx)
ty=rexp(N,hx)
tcens=rbinom(n=N,prob=.3,size=1)# censoring indicator
y=cbind(time=ty,status=1-tcens) # y=Surv(ty,1-tcens) with library(survival)
coxobj <- coxph(Surv(ty, 1-tcens) ~ x)
coxobj_small <- coxph(Surv(ty, 1-tcens) ~1)
anova(coxobj, coxobj_small)
# Analysis of Deviance Table
# Cox model: response is  Surv(ty, 1 - tcens)
# Model 1: ~ x
# Model 2: ~ 1
# loglik  Chisq Df P(>|Chi|) 
# 1 -4095.2                     
# 2 -4102.7 15.151  6  0.01911 *
fit2 <- glmnet(x,y,family="cox", lambda=0) # ridge regression
deviance(fit2)
# [1] 8190.313
fit2$df
# [1] 6
fit2$nulldev - deviance(fit2) # Log-Likelihood ratio statistic
# [1] 15.15097
1-pchisq(fit2$nulldev - deviance(fit2), fit2$df)
# [1] 0.01911446
</syntaxhighlight>
Here is another example including a factor covariate:
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
library(KMsurv) # Data package for Klein & Moeschberge
data(larynx)
larynx$stage <- factor(larynx$stage)
coxobj <- coxph(Surv(time, delta) ~ age + stage, data = larynx)
coef(coxobj)
# age    stage2    stage3    stage4
# 0.0190311 0.1400402 0.6423817 1.7059796
coxobj_small <- coxph(Surv(time, delta)~age, data = larynx)
anova(coxobj, coxobj_small)
# Analysis of Deviance Table
# Cox model: response is  Surv(time, delta)
# Model 1: ~ age + stage
# Model 2: ~ age
# loglik  Chisq Df P(>|Chi|) 
# 1 -187.71                     
# 2 -195.55 15.681  3  0.001318 **
#  ---
#  Signif. codes:  0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1
# Now let's look at the glmnet() function.
# It seems glmnet does not recognize factor covariates.
coxobj2 <- with(larynx, glmnet(cbind(age, stage), Surv(time, delta), family = "cox", lambda=0))
coxobj2$nulldev - deviance(coxobj2)  # Log-Likelihood ratio statistic
# [1] 15.72596
coxobj1 <- with(larynx, glmnet(cbind(1, age), Surv(time, delta), family = "cox", lambda=0))
deviance(coxobj1) - deviance(coxobj2)
# [1] 13.08457
1-pchisq(deviance(coxobj1) - deviance(coxobj2) , coxobj2$df-coxobj1$df)
# [1] 0.0002977376
</syntaxhighlight>
=== High dimensional data ===
https://cran.r-project.org/web/views/Survival.html
=== glmnet + Cox models ===
* [https://bmcmedresmethodol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12874-017-0354-0 Robust estimation of the expected survival probabilities from high-dimensional Cox models with biomarker-by-treatment interactions in randomized clinical trials] by Nils Ternès, Federico Rotolo and Stefan Michiels, BMC Medical Research Methodology, 2017 (open review available). The corresponding software '''biospear''' on [https://cran.microsoft.com/web/packages/biospear/index.html cran] and  [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/biospear/versions/1.0.1 rdocumentation.org].
* [http://r.789695.n4.nabble.com/Predict-in-glmnet-for-cox-family-td4706070.html Expected time of survival in glmnet for cox family]
==== Error in glmnet: x should be a matrix with 2 or more columns ====
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/29231123/why-cant-pass-only-1-coulmn-to-glmnet-when-it-is-possible-in-glm-function-in-r
==== Error in coxnet: (list) object cannot be coerced to type 'double' ====
Fix: do not use data.frame in X. Use cbind() instead.
=== Prognostic index/risk scores ===
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Prognostic_Index International Prognostic Index]
* Low scores correspond to the lowest predicted risk and high scores correspond to the greatest predicted risk.
* The test data were first segregated into high-risk and low-risk groups by the median of training risk scores. [https://bmcmedresmethodol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2288-12-102 Assessment of performance of survival prediction models for cancer prognosis]
* On the paper "The C-index is not proper for the evaluation of t-year predicted risk" [https://academic.oup.com/biostatistics/advance-article/doi/10.1093/biostatistics/kxy006/4864363 Blanche et al 2018] defined the true '''t-year predicted risk''' by <math>P(T \le t | Z) = 1 - Survival</math>
==== linear.predictors component in coxph object ====
The $linear.predictors component is not <math>\beta' x</math>. It is <math>\beta' (x-\mu_x)</math>. See [http://r.789695.n4.nabble.com/coxph-linear-predictors-td3015784.html this post].
==== predict.coxph, prognostic index & risk score ====
* [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/survival/versions/2.41-2/topics/predict.coxph predict.coxph()] Compute fitted values and regression terms for a model fitted by coxph. The Cox model is a relative risk model; predictions of type "linear predictor", "risk", and "terms" are all relative to the sample from which they came. By default, the reference value for each of these is the mean covariate within strata. The primary underlying reason is statistical: a Cox model only predicts relative risks between pairs of subjects within the same strata, and hence the addition of a constant to any covariate, either overall or only within a particular stratum, has no effect on the fitted results. '''Returned value''': a vector or matrix of predictions, or a list containing the predictions (element "fit") and their standard errors (element "se.fit") if the se.fit option is TRUE. <syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
predict(object, newdata,
    type=c("lp", "risk", "expected", "terms", "survival"),
    se.fit=FALSE, na.action=na.pass, terms=names(object$assign), collapse,
    reference=c("strata", "sample"),  ...)
</syntaxhighlight> type:
** "lp": linear predictor
** "risk": risk score exp(lp)
** "expected": the expected number of events given the covariates and follow-up time. The survival probability for a subject is equal to exp(-expected).
** "terms": the terms of the linear predictor.
* http://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/44896/how-to-interpret-the-output-of-predict-coxph. The '''$linear.predictors''' component represents <math>\beta (x - \bar{x})</math>. The risk score (type='risk') corresponds to <math>\exp(\beta (x-\bar{x}))</math>. '''Factors are converted to dummy predictors as usual'''; see [https://stackoverflow.com/questions/14921805/convert-a-factor-to-indicator-variables model.matrix].
* http://www.togaware.com/datamining/survivor/Lung1.html <syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
library(coxph)
fit <- coxph(Surv(time, status) ~ age , lung)
fit
#  Call:
#  coxph(formula = Surv(time, status) ~ age, data = lung)
#      coef exp(coef) se(coef)    z    p
# age 0.0187      1.02  0.0092 2.03 0.042
#
# Likelihood ratio test=4.24  on 1 df, p=0.0395  n= 228, number of events= 165
fit$means
#      age
# 62.44737
# type = "lr" (Linear predictor)
as.numeric(predict(fit,type="lp"))[1:10] 
# [1]  0.21626733  0.10394626 -0.12069589 -0.10197571 -0.04581518  0.21626733
# [7]  0.10394626  0.16010680 -0.17685643 -0.02709500
0.0187 * (lung$age[1:10] - fit$means)
# [1]  0.21603421  0.10383421 -0.12056579 -0.10186579 -0.04576579  0.21603421
# [7]  0.10383421  0.15993421 -0.17666579 -0.02706579
fit$linear.predictors[1:10]
# [1]  0.21626733  0.10394626 -0.12069589 -0.10197571 -0.04581518
# [6]  0.21626733  0.10394626  0.16010680 -0.17685643 -0.02709500
# type = "risk" (Risk score)
> as.numeric(predict(fit,type="risk"))[1:10]
[1] 1.2414342 1.1095408 0.8863035 0.9030515 0.9552185 1.2414342 1.1095408
[8] 1.1736362 0.8379001 0.9732688
> exp((lung$age-mean(lung$age)) * 0.0187)[1:10]
[1] 1.2411448 1.1094165 0.8864188 0.9031508 0.9552657 1.2411448
[7] 1.1094165 1.1734337 0.8380598 0.9732972
> exp(fit$linear.predictors)[1:10]
[1] 1.2414342 1.1095408 0.8863035 0.9030515 0.9552185 1.2414342
[7] 1.1095408 1.1736362 0.8379001 0.9732688
</syntaxhighlight>
=== Survival risk prediction ===
* [https://brb.nci.nih.gov/techreport/Briefings.pdf Using cross-validation to evaluate predictive accuracy of survival risk classifiers based on high-dimensional data] Simon 2011. The authors have noted the CV has been used for optimization of tuning parameters but the data available are too limited for effective into training & test sets.
** The CV Kaplan-Meier curves are essentially unbiased and the separation between the curves gives a fair representation of the value of the expression profiles for predicting survival risk.
** The log-rank statistic does not have the usual chi-squared distribution under the null hypothesis. This is because the data was used to create the risk groups.
** Survival ROC curve can be used as a measure of predictive accuracy for the survival risk group model at a certain landmark time.
** The ROC curve can be misleading. For example if re-substitution is used, the AUC can be very large.
** The p-value for the significance of the test that AUC=.5 for the cross-validated survival ROC curve can be computed by permutations.
* Measure of assessment for prognostic prediction
:{| class="wikitable"
!
! 0/1
! Survival
|-
| Sensitivity
| <math>P(Pred=1|True=1)</math>
| <math>P(\beta' X > c | T < t)</math>
|-
| Specificity
| <math>P(Pred=0|True=0)</math>
| <math>P(\beta' X \le c | T \ge t)</math>
|}
* [http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/sim.4106/full An evaluation of resampling methods for assessment of survival risk prediction in high-dimensional settings] Subramanian, et al 2010.
** The conditional probabilities can be estimated by Heagerty et al 2000 (R package [https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/survivalROC/index.html survivalROC]). '''The AUC(t) can be used for comparing and assessing prognostic models (a measure of accuracy) for future samples.''' In the absence of an independent large dataset, an estimate for AUC(t) is obtained through resampling from the original sample <math>S_n</math>.
** Resubstitution estimate of AUC(t) (i.e. all observations were used for feature selection, model building as well as the estimation of accuracy) is too optimistic. So k-fold CV method is considered.
** There are two ways to compute k-fold CV estimate of AUC(t): the pooling strategy (used in the paper) and average strategy (AUC(t)s are first computed for each test set and are then averaged). In the pooling strategy, all the test set risk-score predictions are first collected and AUC(t) is calculated on this combined set.
** Conclusions: sample splitting and LOOCV have a higher mean square error than other methods. 5-fold or 10-fold CV provide a good balance between bias and variability for a wide range of data settings.
* [https://brb.nci.nih.gov/techreport/JNCI-NSLC-Signatures.pdf Gene Expression–Based Prognostic Signatures in Lung Cancer: Ready for Clinical Use?] Subramanian, et al 2010.
* [https://academic.oup.com/bioinformatics/article/23/14/1768/188061/Assessment-of-survival-prediction-models-based-on Assessment of survival prediction models based on microarray data] Martin Schumacher, et al. 2007
* [http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.0020108 Semi-Supervised Methods to Predict Patient Survival from Gene Expression Data]  Eric Bair , Robert Tibshirani, 2004
* Time dependent ROC curves for censored survival data and a diagnostic marker. Heagerty et al, Biometrics 2000
** [http://faculty.washington.edu/heagerty/Software/SurvROC/SurvivalROC/survivalROCdiscuss.pdf An introduction to survivalROC] by Saha, Heagerty. If the AUCs are computed at several time points, we can plot the AUCs vs time for different models (eg different covariates) and compare them to see which model performs better.
** The '''survivalROC''' package does not draw an ROC curve. It outputs FP (x-axis) and TP (y-axis). We can use basic R or ggplot to draw the curve.
** [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/survivalROC/versions/1.0.1/topics/survivalROC survivalROC()] calculates AUC at specified time by using NNE method (default). We can use the prognostic index as marker when there are more than one markers is used. Note that [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/survAUC/versions/1.0-5/topics/AUC.uno survAUC::AUC.uno()] uses Uno (2007) to calculate FP and TP.
** [https://rstudio-pubs-static.s3.amazonaws.com/3506_36a9509e9d544386bd3e69de30bca608.html Assessment of Discrimination in Survival Analysis (C-statistics, etc)]
** [http://sachsmc.github.io/plotROC/ plotROC] package by Sachs for showing ROC curves from multiple time points on the same plot.
** [https://datascienceplus.com/time-dependent-roc-for-survival-prediction-models-in-r/ Time-dependent ROC for Survival Prediction Models in R]
** survivalROC怎么看最佳cut-off值?/ HOW to use the survivalROC to get optimal cut-off values?
* [https://bmcbioinformatics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2105-10-413 Survival prediction from clinico-genomic models - a comparative study] Hege M Bøvelstad, 2009
* [http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19990915/30)18:17/18%3C2529::AID-SIM274%3E3.0.CO;2-5/full Assessment and comparison of prognostic classification schemes for survival data]. E. Graf, C. Schmoor, W. Sauerbrei, et al. 1999
* [http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(20000229)19:4%3C453::AID-SIM350%3E3.0.CO;2-5/full What do we mean by validating a prognostic model?] Douglas G. Altman, Patrick Royston, 2000
* [http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/sim.3768/full On the prognostic value of survival models with application to gene expression signatures] T. Hielscher, M. Zucknick, W. Werft, A. Benner, 2000
* Accuracy of point predictions in survival analysis, Henderson et al, Statist Med, 2001.
* [https://bmcmedresmethodol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2288-12-102 Assessment of performance of survival prediction models for cancer prognosis] Hung-Chia Chen et al 2012
* [http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/sim.7342/abstract Accuracy of predictive ability measures for survival models] Flandre, Detsch and O'Quigley, 2017.
* [http://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006026 Association between expression of random gene sets and survival is evident in multiple cancer types and may be explained by sub-classification] Yishai Shimoni, PLOS 2018
* [http://www.bmj.com/content/bmj/357/bmj.j2497 Development and validation of risk prediction equations to estimate survival in patients with colorectal cancer: cohort study]
* [http://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006076 Cox-nnet: An artificial neural network method for prognosis prediction of high-throughput omics data] Ching et al 2018.
=== Assessing the performance of prediction models ===
* [https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/sim.6246 Investigating the prediction ability of survival models based on both clinical and omics data: two case studies] by Riccardo De Bin, Statistics in Medicine 2014. (not useful)
* [https://bmcmedresmethodol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2288-12-102 Assessment of performance of survival prediction models for cancer prognosis] Chen et al , BMC Medical Research Methodology 2012
* [https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/sim.4242 A simulation study of predictive ability measures in a survival model I: Explained variation measures] Choodari‐Oskooei et al, Stat in Medicine 2011
* [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3575184/ Assessing the performance of prediction models: a framework for some traditional and novel measures] by Ewout W. Steyerberg, Andrew J. Vickers, [...], and Michael W. Kattan, 2010.
* [https://academic.oup.com/bioinformatics/article/27/22/3206/194302 survcomp: an R/Bioconductor package for performance assessment and comparison of survival models] paper in 2011 and [http://bcb.dfci.harvard.edu/~aedin/courses/Bioconductor/survival.pdf Introduction to R and Bioconductor Survival analysis] where the survcomp package can be used. The summary here is based on this paper.
* [https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/181634/how-to-compare-predictive-power-of-survival-models How to compare predictive power of survival models?]
* [https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/17604/how-to-compare-harrell-c-index-from-different-models-in-survival-analysis How to compare Harrell C-index from different models in survival analysis?] and [https://stats.stackexchange.com/q/17648 Frank Harrell's comment]: Doing model comparison with LR statistics is more powerful than using methods that depend on an asymptotic distribution of the C-index.
==== Hazard ratio ====
[https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/survcomp/versions/1.22.0/topics/hazard.ratio hazard.ratio()]
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
hazard.ratio(x, surv.time, surv.event, weights, strat, alpha = 0.05,
            method.test = c("logrank", "likelihood.ratio", "wald"), na.rm = FALSE, ...)
</syntaxhighlight>
==== D index ====
[https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/survcomp/versions/1.22.0/topics/D.index D.index()]
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
D.index(x, surv.time, surv.event, weights, strat, alpha = 0.05,
        method.test = c("logrank", "likelihood.ratio", "wald"), na.rm = FALSE, ...)
</syntaxhighlight>
==== AUC ====
See [[#ROC_curve_and_Brier_score|ROC curve]].
Comparison:
* AUC <math> P(Z_1 > Z_0) </math>: the probability that a randomly selected '''case''' will have a higher test result (marker value) than a randomly selected '''control'''. It represents a measure of concordance between the marker and the disease status. ROC curves are particularly useful for comparing the discriminatory capacity of different potential biomarkers. (Heagerty & Zheng 2005)
* C-statistic <math> P(\beta' Z_1 > \beta' Z_2|T_1 < T_2) </math>: the probability of concordance between predicted and observed responses. The probability that the predictions for a random pair of subjects are concordant with their outcomes. (Heagerty & Zheng 2005)
p95 of Heagerty and Zheng (2005) gave a relationship of C-statistic:
<math>
C = P(M_j > M_k | T_j < T_k) = \int_t \mbox{AUC(t) w(t)} \; dt
</math>
where ''M'' is the marker value and <math>w(t) = 2 \cdot f(t) \cdot S(t) </math>. When the interest is in the accuracy of a regression model we will use <math>M_i = Z_i^T \beta</math>.
The time-dependent AUC is also related to time-dependent C-index. <math> C_\tau = P(M_j > M_k | T_j < T_k, T_j < \tau) = \int_t \mbox{AUC(t)} \mbox{w}_{\tau}(t) \; dt  </math> where <math> w_\tau(t) = 2 \cdot f(t) \cdot S(t)/(1-S^2(\tau))</math>.
==== Concordance index/C-index/C-statistic interpretation and R packages ====
* The area under ROC curve (plot of sensitivity of 1-specificity) is also called C-statistic. It is a measure of discrimination generalized for survival data (Harrell 1982 & 2001). The ROC are functions of the sensitivity and specificity for each value of the measure of model. (Nancy Cook, 2007)
** The sensitivity of a test is the probability of a positive test result, or of a value above a threshold, among those with disease (cases).
** The specificity of a test is the probability of a negative test result, or of a value below a threshold, among those without disease (noncases).
** Perfect discrimination corresponds to a c-statistic of 1 & is achieved if the scores for all the cases are higher than those for all the non-cases.
** The c-statistic is the '''probability that the measure or predicted risk/risk score is higher for a case than for a noncase'''.
** The c-statistic is not the probability that individuals are classified correctly or that a person with a high test score will eventually become a case.
** C-statistic is a rank-based measure. The c-statistic describes how well models can rank order cases and noncases, but not a function of the actual predicted probabilities.
* [https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/29815/how-to-interpret-the-output-for-calculating-concordance-index-c-index?noredirect=1&lq=1 How to interpret the output for calculating concordance index (c-index)?] <math>
P(\beta' Z_1 > \beta' Z_2|T_1 < T_2)
</math> where ''T'' is the survival time and ''Z'' is the covariates.
**  It is the '''fraction of pairs in your data, where the observation with the higher survival time has the higher probability of survival predicted by your model'''.
** High values mean that your model predicts higher probabilities of survival for higher observed survival times.
** The c index estimates the '''probability of concordance between predicted and observed responses'''. A value of 0.5 indicates no predictive discrimination and a value of 1.0 indicates perfect separation of patients with different outcomes. (p371 Harrell 1996)
* Drawback of C-statistics:
** Even though rank indexes such as c are widely applicable and easily interpretable, '''they are not sensitive for detecting small differences in discrimination ability between two models.''' This is due to the fact that a rank method considers the (prediction, outcome) pairs (0.01,0), (0.9, 1) as no more concordant than the pairs (0.05,0), (0.8, 1). A more sensitive likelihood-ratio Chi-square-based statistic that reduces to R2 in the linear regression case may be substituted. (p371 Harrell 1996)
** If the model is correct, the '''likelihood based measures may be more sensitive in detecting differences in prediction ability''', compared to rank-based measures such as C-indexes. (Uno 2011 p 1113)
* http://dmkd.cs.vt.edu/TUTORIAL/Survival/Slides.pdf
* [https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/survival/vignettes/concordance.pdf Concordance] vignette from the survival package. It has a good summary of different ways (such as Kendall's tau and Somers' d) to calculate the '''concordance statistic'''. The ''concordance'' function in the survival package can be used with various types of models including logistic and linear regression.
* <span style="color: magenta"> Assessment of Discrimination in Survival Analysis (C-statistics, etc) </span> [https://rstudio-pubs-static.s3.amazonaws.com/3506_36a9509e9d544386bd3e69de30bca608.html webpage]
* [http://gaodoris.blogspot.com/2012/10/5-ways-to-estimate-concordance-index.html 5 Ways to Estimate Concordance Index for Cox Models in R, Why Results Aren't Identical?], [http://zeegroom.com/2015/10/10/cindex/ C-index/C-statistic 计算的5种不同方法及比较]. The 5 functions are rcorrcens() from Hmisc, summary()$concordance from survival, survConcordance() from survival, concordance.index() from survcomp and cph() from rms.
* Summary of R packages to compute C-statistic
: {| class="wikitable"
! Package
! Function
! New data?
|-
| survival
| summary(coxph(formula, data))$concordance["C"]
| no
|-
| survC1
| [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/survC1/versions/1.0-2/topics/Est.Cval Est.Cval()]
| no
|-
| survAUC
| [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/survAUC/versions/1.0-5/topics/UnoC UnoC()]
| yes
|-
| survcomp
| [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/survcomp/versions/1.22.0/topics/concordance.index concordance.index()]
| ?
|-
| Hmisc
| [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/Hmisc/versions/4.2-0/topics/rcorr.cens rcorr.cens()]
| no
|-
| pec
| [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/pec/versions/2018.07.26/topics/cindex cindex()]
| yes
|}
==== Integrated brier score (≈ "mean squared error" of prediction for survival data) ====
[http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19990915/30)18:17/18%3C2529::AID-SIM274%3E3.0.CO;2-5/full Assessment and comparison of prognostic classification schemes for survival data] Graf et al Stat. Med. 1999 2529-45, [https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/bimj.200610301 Consistent Estimation of the Expected Brier Score in General Survival Models with Right‐Censored Event Times] Gerds et al 2006.
* Because the point predictions of event-free times will almost inevitably given inaccurate and unsatisfactory result, the mean square error of prediction <math>\frac{1}{n}\sum_1^n (T_i - \hat{T}(X_i))^2</math> method will not be considered. See Parkes 1972 or [http://www.lcc.uma.es/~jja/recidiva/055.pdf Henderson] 2001.
* Another approach is to predict the survival or event status <math>Y=I(T > \tau)</math> at a fixed time point <math>\tau</math> for a patient with X=x. This leads to the expected Brier score <math>E[(Y - \hat{S}(\tau|X))^2]</math> where <math>\hat{S}(\tau|X)</math> is the estimated event-free probabilities (survival probability) at time <math>\tau</math> for subject with predictor variable <math>X</math>.
* The time-dependent Brier score (without censoring)
: <math>
\begin{align}
  \mbox{Brier}(\tau) &= \frac{1}{n}\sum_1^n (I(T_i>\tau) - \hat{S}(\tau|X_i))^2 
\end{align}
</math>
* The time-dependent Brier score (with censoring, C is the censoring variable)
: <math>
\begin{align}
  \mbox{Brier}(\tau) = \frac{1}{n}\sum_i^n\bigg[\frac{(\hat{S}_C(t_i))^2I(t_i \leq \tau, \delta_i=1)}{\hat{S}_C(t_i)} + \frac{(1 - \hat{S}_C(t_i))^2 I(t_i > \tau)}{\hat{S}_C(\tau)}\bigg]
\end{align}
</math>
where <math>\hat{S}_C(t_i) = P(C > t_i)</math>, the Kaplan-Meier estimate of the censoring distribution with <math>t_i</math> the survival time of patient ''i''.
The integration of the Brier score can be done by over time <math>t \in [0, \tau]</math> with respect to some weight function W(t) for which a natual choice is <math>(1 - \hat{S}(t))/(1-\hat{S}(\tau))</math>. The lower the iBrier score, the larger the prediction accuracy is.
* Useful benchmark values for the Brier score are 33%, which corresponds to predicting the risk by a random number drawn from U[0, 1], and 25% which corresponds to predicting 50% risk for everyone. See [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4194196/pdf/nihms-589222.pdf Evaluating Random Forests for Survival Analysis using Prediction Error Curves] by Mogensen et al J. Stat Software 2012 ([https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/pec/index.html pec] package). The paper has a good summary of different R package implementing Brier scores.
R function
* [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/pec/versions/2.5.4 pec] by Thomas A. Gerds. The plot.pec() can plot '''prediction error curves''' (defined by Brier score). See an example from [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4841879/pdf/IJPH-45-239.pdf#page=5 this paper]. The .632+ bootstrap prediction error curves is from the paper [https://academic.oup.com/bioinformatics/article/25/7/890/211193#2275428 Boosting for high-dimensional time-to-event data with competing risks] 2009
* [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/peperr/versions/1.1-7 peperr] package. The package peperr is an early branch of pec.
* [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/survcomp/versions/1.22.0/topics/sbrier.score2proba survcomp::sbrier.score2proba()].
* [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/ipred/versions/0.9-5/topics/sbrier ipred::sbrier()]
Papers on high dimensional covariates
* Assessment of survival prediction models based on microarray data, Bioinformatics , 2007, vol. 23 (pg. 1768-74)
* Allowing for mandatory covariates in boosting estimation of sparse high-dimensional survival models, BMC Bioinformatics , 2008, vol. 9 pg. 14
==== Kendall's tau, Goodman-Kruskal's gamma, Somers' d ====
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kendall_rank_correlation_coefficient
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodman_and_Kruskal%27s_gamma
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somers%27_D
* [https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/survival/vignettes/concordance.pdf Survival package] has a good summary. Especially '''concordance = (d+1)/2'''.
==== C-statistics ====
* C-statistics is the probability of concordance between predicted and observed survival.
* [https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/sim.6370 Comparing two correlated C indices with right‐censored survival outcome: a one‐shot nonparametric approach] Kang et al, Stat in Med, 2014. [https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/compareC/index.html compareC] package for comparing two correlated C-indices with right censored outcomes. [https://support.sas.com/resources/papers/proceedings17/SAS0462-2017.pdf#page=13 Harrell’s Concordance]. The s.e. of the Harrell's C-statistics can be estimated by the delta method. <math>
\begin{align}
C_H = \frac{\sum_{i,j}I(t_i < t_{j}) I(\hat{\beta} Z_i > \hat{\beta} Z_j) \delta_i}{\sum_{i,j} I(t_i < t_j) \delta_i}
\end{align}
</math> converges to a censoring-dependent quantity <math> P(\beta'Z_1 > \beta' Z_2|T_1 < T_2, T_1 < \text{min}(D_1,D_2)).</math> Here ''D'' is the censoring variable.
* [http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3079915 On the C-statistics for Evaluating Overall Adequacy of Risk Prediction Procedures with Censored Survival Data] by Uno et al 2011. Let <math>\tau</math> be a specified time point within the support of the censoring variable. <math>
\begin{align}
C(\tau) = \text{UnoC}(\hat{\pi}, \tau)
        = \frac{\sum_{i,i'}(\hat{S}_C(t_i))^{-2}I(t_i < t_{i'}, t_i < \tau) I(\hat{\beta}'Z_i > \hat{\beta}'Z_{i'}) \delta_i}{\sum_{i,i'}(\hat{S}_C(t_i))^{-2}I(t_i < t_{i'}, t_i < \tau) \delta_i}
\end{align}
</math>, a measure of the concordance between <math>\hat{\beta} Z_i</math> (the linear predictor) and the survival time. <math>\hat{S}_C(t)</math> is the Kaplan-Meier estimator for the '''censoring distribution/variable/time''' (cf '''event time'''); flipping the definition of <math>\delta_i</math>/considering failure events as "censored" observations and censored observations as "failures" and computing the KM as usual; see p207 of [https://amstat.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1198/000313001317098185#.WtS-pNPwY3F Satten 2001] and the [https://github.com/cran/survC1/blob/master/R/FUN-cstat-ver003b.R#L282 source code from the kmcens()] in survC1. Note that <math>C_\tau</math> converges to <math> P(\beta'Z_1 > \beta' Z_2|T_1 < T_2, T_1 < \tau).</math>
** <span style="color: red">Uno's estimator does not require the fitted model to be correct </span>. See also table V in the simulation study where the true model is log-normal regression.
** <span style="color: red">Uno's estimator is consistent for a population concordance measure that is free of censoring</span>. See the coverage result in table IV and V from his simulation study. Other forms of C-statistic estimate population parameters that may depend on the current study-specific censoring distribution.
** To accommodate discrete risk scores, in survC1::Est.Cval(), it is using the formula <math>.
\begin{align}
\frac{\sum_{i,i'}[ (\hat{S}_C(t_i))^{-2}I(t_i < t_{i'}, t_i < \tau) I(\hat{\beta}'Z_i > \hat{\beta}'Z_{i'}) \delta_i +  0.5 * (\hat{S}_C(t_i))^{-2}I(t_i < t_{i'}, t_i < \tau) I(\hat{\beta}'Z_i = \hat{\beta}'Z_{i'}) \delta_i ]}{\sum_{i,i'}(\hat{S}_C(t_i))^{-2}I(t_i < t_{i'}, t_i < \tau) \delta_i}
\end{align}
</math>. '''Note that pec::cindex() is using the same formula but survAUC::UnoC() does not.'''
** If the specified <math>\tau</math> (tau) is 'too' large such that very few events were observed or very few subjects were followed beyond this time point, the standard error estimate for <math>\hat{C}_\tau</math> can be quite large.
** Uno mentioned from (page 95) Heagerty and Zheng 2005 that when T is right censoring, one would typically consider <math>C_\tau</math> with a fixed, prespecified follow-up period <math>(0, \tau)</math>.
** Uno also mentioned that when the data is right censored, the censoring variable ''D'' is usually shorter than that of the failure time ''T'', the tail part of the estimated survival function of T is rather unstable. Thus we consider a truncated version of C.
** Heagerty and Zheng (2005) p95 said '''<math>C_\tau</math> is the probability that the predictions for a random pair of subjects are concordant with their outcomes, given that the smaller event time occurs in <math>(0, \tau)</math>'''.
** real data 1: fit a Cox model. Get risk scores <math>\hat{\beta}'Z</math>. Compute the point and confidence interval estimates (M=500 indep. random samples with the same sample size as the observation data) of <math>C_\tau</math> for different <math>\tau</math>. Compare them with the conventional C-index procedure (Korn).
** real data 1: compute <math>C_\tau</math> for a full model and a reduce model. Compute the difference of them (<math>C_\tau^{(A)} - C_\tau^{(B)} = .01</math>) and the 95% confidence interval (-0.00, .02) of the difference for testing the importance of some variable (HDL in this case). '''Though HDL is quite significant (p=0) with respect to the risk of CV disease but its incremental value evaluated via C-statistics is quite modest.'''
** real data 2: goal - evaluate the prognostic value of a new gene signature in predicting the time to death or metastasis for breast cancer patients. Two models were fitted; one with age+ER and the other is gene+age+ER. For each model we can calculate the point and interval estimates of <math>C_\tau</math> for different <math>\tau</math>s.
** simulation: T is from Weibull regression for case 1 and log-normal regression for case 2. Covariates = (age, ER, gene). 3 kinds of censoring were considered. Sample size is 100, 150, 200 and 300. 1000 iterations. Compute coverage probabilities and average length of 95% confidence intervals, bias and root mean square error for <math>\tau</math> equals to 10 and 15. Compared with the conventional approach, the new method has higher coverage probabilities and less bias in 6 scenarios.
* [https://academic.oup.com/ndt/article/25/5/1399/1843002 Statistical methods for the assessment of prognostic biomarkers (Part I): Discrimination] by Tripep et al 2010
* '''Gonen and Heller''' 2005 concordance index for Cox models
** <math>P(T_2>T_1|g(Z_1)>g(Z_2))</math>. Gonen and Heller's  c statistic which is independent of censoring.
** [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/survAUC/versions/1.0-5/topics/GHCI GHCI()] from survAUC package. Strangely only one parameter is needed. survAUC allows for testing data but CPE package does not have an option for testing data. <syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
TR <- ovarian[1:16,]
TE <- ovarian[17:26,]
train.fit  <- coxph(Surv(futime, fustat) ~ age,
                    x=TRUE, y=TRUE, method="breslow", data=TR)
lpnew <- predict(train.fit, newdata=TE)     
survAUC::GHCI(lpnew) # .8515
lpnew2 <- predict(train.fit, newdata = TR)
survAUC::GHCI(lpnew2) # 0.8079495
CPE::phcpe(train.fit, CPE.SE = TRUE)
# $CPE
# [1] 0.8079495
# $CPE.SE
# [1] 0.0670646
Hmisc::rcorr.cens(-TR$age, Surv(TR$futime, TR$fustat))["C Index"]
# 0.7654321
Hmisc::rcorr.cens(TR$age, Surv(TR$futime, TR$fustat))["C Index"]
# 0.2345679
</syntaxhighlight>
** Used by [https://bioconductor.org/packages/release/bioc/vignettes/simulatorZ/inst/doc/simulatorZ-vignette.pdf#page=11 simulatorZ] package
* '''Uno's C-statistics (2011)''' and some examples using different packages
** C-statistic may or may not be a decreasing function of '''tau'''. However, AUC(t) may not be decreasing; see Fig 1 of Blanche et al 2018. <syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
library(survAUC); library(pec)
set.seed(1234)
dat <- simulWeib(N=100, lambda=0.01, rho=1, beta=-0.6, rateC=0.001) # simulWebib was defined above
#    coef exp(coef) se(coef)    z      p
# x -0.744    0.475    0.269 -2.76 0.0057
TR <- dat[1:80,]
TE <- dat[81:100,]
train.fit  <- coxph(Surv(time, status) ~ x, data=TR)
plot(survfit(Surv(time, status) ~ 1, data =TR))
lpnew <- predict(train.fit, newdata=TE)
Surv.rsp <- Surv(TR$time, TR$status)
Surv.rsp.new <- Surv(TE$time, TE$status)             
sapply(c(.25, .5, .75),
      function(qtl) UnoC(Surv.rsp, Surv.rsp.new, lpnew, time=quantile(TR$time, qtl)))
# [1] 0.2580193 0.2735142 0.2658271
sapply(c(.25, .5, .75),
      function(qtl) cindex( list(matrix( -lpnew, nrow = nrow(TE))),
        formula = Surv(time, status) ~ x,
        data = TE,
        eval.times = quantile(TR$time, qtl))$AppC$matrix)
# [1] 0.5041490 0.5186850 0.5106746
</syntaxhighlight>
** Four elements are needed for computing truncated C-statistic using survAUC::UnoC. But it seems pec::cindex does not need the training data.
*** training data including covariates,
*** testing data including covariates,
*** predictor from new data,
*** truncation time/evaluation time/prediction horizon.
** (From ?UnoC) Uno's estimator is based on '''inverse-probability-of-censoring weights''' and '''does not assume a specific working model for deriving the predictor lpnew'''. It is assumed, however, that there is a one-to-one relationship between the predictor and the expected survival times conditional on the predictor. Note that the estimator implemented in UnoC is restricted to situations where the random censoring assumption holds.
** [https://rdrr.io/cran/survAUC/man/UnoC.html survAUC::UnoC()]. The '''tau''' parameter: Truncation time. The resulting C tells how well the given prediction model works in predicting events that occur in the time range from 0 to tau. <math> P(\beta'Z_1 > \beta' Z_2|T_1 < T_2, T_1 < \tau).</math> Con: no confidence interval estimate for <math>C_\tau</math> nor <math>C_\tau^{(A)} - C_\tau^{(B)}</math>
** [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/pec/versions/2.4.9/topics/cindex pec::cindex()]. At each timepoint of '''eval.times''' the c-index is computed using only those pairs where one of the event times is known to be earlier than this timepoint. If eval.times is missing or Inf then the '''largest uncensored''' event time is used. See a more general example from [https://github.com/tagteam/webappendix-cindex-not-proper/blob/bdc0a70778955f36aeb1d6566590a51d1913702f/R/cindex-t-year-risk-supplementary-material.R#L118 here]
** Est.Cval() from the [https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/survC1/index.html survC1] package (the only package gives confidence intervals of C-statistic or deltaC, authored by H. Uno). It doesn't take new data nor the vector of predictors obtained from the test data. Pro: [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/survC1/versions/1.0-2/topics/Inf.Cval Inf.Cval()] can compute the confidence interval (perturbation-resampling based) of <math>C_\tau</math> & [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/survC1/versions/1.0-2/topics/Inf.Cval.Delta Inf.Cval.Delta()] for the difference <math>C_\tau^{(A)} - C_\tau^{(B)}</math>.  <syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
library(survAUC)
# require training and predict sets
TR <- ovarian[1:16,]
TE <- ovarian[17:26,]
train.fit  <- coxph(Surv(futime, fustat) ~ age, data=TR)
lpnew <- predict(train.fit, newdata=TE)
Surv.rsp <- Surv(TR$futime, TR$fustat)
Surv.rsp.new <- Surv(TE$futime, TE$fustat)             
UnoC(Surv.rsp, Surv.rsp, train.fit$linear.predictors, time=365.25*1)
# [1] 0.9761905
UnoC(Surv.rsp, Surv.rsp, train.fit$linear.predictors, time=365.25*2)
# [1] 0.7308979
UnoC(Surv.rsp, Surv.rsp, train.fit$linear.predictors, time=365.25*3)
# [1] 0.7308979
UnoC(Surv.rsp, Surv.rsp, train.fit$linear.predictors, time=365.25*4)
# [1] 0.7308979
UnoC(Surv.rsp, Surv.rsp, train.fit$linear.predictors, time=365.25*5)
# [1] 0.7308979
UnoC(Surv.rsp, Surv.rsp, train.fit$linear.predictors)
# [1] 0.7308979
# So the function UnoC() can obtain the exact result as Est.Cval().
# Now try on a new data set. Question: why do we need Surv.rsp?
UnoC(Surv.rsp, Surv.rsp.new, lpnew)
# [1] 0.7333333
UnoC(Surv.rsp, Surv.rsp.new, lpnew, time=365.25*2)
# [1] 0.7333333
library(pec)
cindex( list(matrix( -lpnew, nrow = nrow(TE))),
        formula = Surv(futime, fustat) ~ age,
        data = TE, eval.times = 365.25*2)$AppC
# $matrix
# [1] 0.7333333
library(survC1)
Est.Cval(cbind(TE, lpnew), tau = 365.25*2, nofit = TRUE)$Dhat
# [1] 0.7333333
# tau is mandatory (>0), no need to have training and predict sets
Est.Cval(ovarian[1:16, c(1,2, 3)], tau=365.25*1)$Dhat
# [1] 0.9761905
Est.Cval(ovarian[1:16, c(1,2, 3)], tau=365.25*2)$Dhat
# [1] 0.7308979
Est.Cval(ovarian[1:16, c(1,2, 3)], tau=365.25*3)$Dhat
# [1] 0.7308979
Est.Cval(ovarian[1:16, c(1,2, 3)], tau=365.25*4)$Dhat
# [1] 0.7308979
Est.Cval(ovarian[1:16, c(1,2, 3)], tau=365.25*5)$Dhat
# [1] 0.7308979
svg("~/Downloads/c_stat_scatter.svg", width=8, height=5)
par(mfrow=c(1,2))
plot(TR$futime, train.fit$linear.predictors, main="training data",
    xlab="time", ylab="predictor")
mtext("C=.731 at t=2", 3)
plot(TE$futime, lpnew, main="testing data", xlab="time", ylab="predictor")
mtext("C=.733 at t=2", 3)
dev.off()
</syntaxhighlight> [[File:C stat scatter.svg|600px]]
* Assessing the prediction accuracy of a cure model for censored survival data with long-term survivors: Application to breast cancer data
* The use of ROC for defining the validity of the prognostic index in censored data
* [http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/115/7/928 Use and Misuse of the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve in Risk Prediction] Cook 2007
* '''Evaluating Discrimination of Risk Prediction Models: The C Statistic''' by Pencina et al, JAMA 2015
* '''Blanche et al(2018)''' [https://academic.oup.com/biostatistics/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/biostatistics/kxy006/4864363?redirectedFrom=fulltext The c-index is not proper for the evaluation of t-year predicted risks]
** There is a bug on script [https://github.com/tagteam/webappendix-cindex-not-proper/blob/master/R/cindex-t-year-risk-supplementary-material.R#L154 line 154].
** With a fixed prediction horizon, '''the concordance index can be higher for a misspecified model than for a correctly specified model'''. The time-dependent AUC does not have this problem.
** (page 8) ''We now show that when a misspecified prediction model satisfies the ranking condition but the true distribution does not, then it is possible that the misspecified model achieves a misleadingly high c-index.''
** The traditional C‐statistic used for the survival models is not guaranteed to identify the “best” model for estimating the risk of t-year survival. In contrast, measures of predicted error do not suffer from these limitations. See this paper [https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ajt.15132 The relationship between the C‐statistic and the accuracy of program‐specific evaluations] by Wey et al 2018
** Unfortunately, a drawback of Harrell’s c-index for the time to event and competing risk settings is that the measure does not provide a value specific to the time horizon of prediction (e.g., a 3-year risk). See this paper [https://diagnprognres.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s41512-018-0029-2 The index of prediction accuracy: an intuitive measure useful for evaluating risk prediction models] by Kattan and Gerds 2018.
** In Fig 1 Y-axis is concordance (AUC/C) and X-axis is time, the caption said '''The ability of (some variable) to discriminate patients who will either die or be transplanted within the next t-years from those who will be event-free at time t'''.
** The <math>\tau</math> considered here is the maximal end of follow-up time
** AUC (riskRegression::Score()), Uno-C (pec::cindex()), Harrell's C (Hmisc::rcorr.cens() for censored and summary(fit)$concordance for uncensored) are considered.
** The C_IPCW(t) or C_Harrell(t) is obtained by artificially censoring the outcome at time t. So C_IPCW(t) is different from Uno's version.
==== C-statistic limitations ====
See the discussion section of [https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ajt.15132 The relationship between the C‐statistic and the accuracy of program‐specific evaluations] by Wey 2018
* '''Correctly specified models''' can have low or high C‐statistics. Thus, the C‐statistic cannot identify a correctly specified model.
* the traditional C‐statistic used for the survival models is not guaranteed to identify the “best” model for estimating the risk of, for example, 1‐year survival
Importantly, there exists no measure of risk discrimination or predicted error that can identify a correctly specified model, because they all depend on unknown characteristics of the data. For example, the C‐statistic depends on the variability in recipient‐level risk, while measures of squared error such as the Brier Score depend on residual variability.
==== C-statistic applications ====
* [https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/01621459.2018.1482756 Semiparametric Regression Analysis of Multiple Right- and Interval-Censored Events] by Gao et al, JASA 2018
* A c statistic of 0.7–0.8 is considered good, while >0.8 is considered excellent. See [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168827817322481#bb0090 this paper]. 2018
* The C statistic, also termed concordance statistic or c-index, is analogous to the area under the curve and is a global measure of model discrimination. Discrimination refers to the ability of a risk prediction model to separate patients who develop a health outcome from patients who do not develop a health outcome. Effectively, the C statistic is the probability that a model will result in a higher-risk score for a patient who develops the outcomes of interest compared with a patient who does not develop the outcomes of interest. See [https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/article-abstract/2703140 the paper] JAMA 2018
==== C-statistic vs LRT comparing nested models ====
1. Binary data
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
# https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/46523/how-to-simulate-artificial-data-for-logistic-regression
set.seed(666)
x1 = rnorm(1000)          # some continuous variables
x2 = rnorm(1000)
z = 1 + 2*x1 + 3*x2        # linear combination with a bias
pr = 1/(1+exp(-z))        # pass through an inv-logit function
y = rbinom(1000,1,pr)      # bernoulli response variable
df = data.frame(y=y,x1=x1,x2=x2)
fit <- glm( y~x1+x2,data=df,family="binomial")
summary(fit)
# Estimate Std. Error z value Pr(>|z|)   
# (Intercept)  0.9915    0.1185  8.367  <2e-16 ***
#  x1            2.2731    0.1789  12.709  <2e-16 ***
#  x2            3.1853    0.2157  14.768  <2e-16 ***
#  ---
#  Signif. codes:  0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1
#
# (Dispersion parameter for binomial family taken to be 1)
#
# Null deviance: 1355.16  on 999  degrees of freedom
# Residual deviance:  582.93  on 997  degrees of freedom
# AIC: 588.93
confint.default(fit)
#                2.5 %  97.5 %
# (Intercept) 0.7592637 1.223790
# x1          1.9225261 2.623659
# x2          2.7625861 3.608069
# LRT - likelihood ratio test
fit2 <- glm( y~x1,data=df,family="binomial")
anova.res <- anova(fit2, fit)
# Analysis of Deviance Table
#
# Model 1: y ~ x1
# Model 2: y ~ x1 + x2
#  Resid. Df Resid. Dev Df Deviance
# 1      998    1186.16           
# 2      997    582.93  1  603.23
1-pchisq( abs(anova.res$Deviance[2]), abs(anova.res$Df[2]))
# [1] 0
# Method 1: use ROC package to compute AUC
library(ROC)
set.seed(123)
markers <- predict(fit, newdata = data.frame(x1, x2), type = "response")
roc1 <- rocdemo.sca( truth=y, data=markers, rule=dxrule.sca )
auc <- AUC(roc1); print(auc) # [1] 0.9459085
markers2 <- predict(fit2, newdata = data.frame(x1), type = "response")
roc2 <- rocdemo.sca( truth=y, data=markers2, rule=dxrule.sca )
auc2 <- AUC(roc2); print(auc2) # [1] 0.7259098
auc - auc2 # [1] 0.2199987
# Method 2: use pROC package to compute AUC
roc_obj <- pROC::roc(y, markers)
pROC::auc(roc_obj) # Area under the curve: 0.9459
# Method 3: Compute AUC by hand
# https://www.r-bloggers.com/calculating-auc-the-area-under-a-roc-curve/
auc_probability <- function(labels, scores, N=1e7){
  pos <- sample(scores[labels], N, replace=TRUE)
  neg <- sample(scores[!labels], N, replace=TRUE)
  # sum( (1 + sign(pos - neg))/2)/N # does the same thing
  (sum(pos > neg) + sum(pos == neg)/2) / N # give partial credit for ties
}
auc_probability(as.logical(y), markers) # [1] 0.945964
</syntaxhighlight>
2. Survival data
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
library(survival)
data(ovarian)
head(ovarian)
range(ovarian$futime) # [1]  59 1227
plot(survfit(Surv(futime, fustat) ~ 1, data = ovarian))
coxph(Surv(futime, fustat) ~ rx + age, data = ovarian)
#        coef exp(coef) se(coef)    z      p
# rx  -0.8040    0.4475  0.6320 -1.27 0.2034
# age  0.1473    1.1587  0.0461  3.19 0.0014
#
# Likelihood ratio test=15.9  on 2 df, p=0.000355
# n= 26, number of events= 12
require(survC1)
covs0 <- as.matrix(ovarian[, c("rx")])
covs1 <- as.matrix(ovarian[, c("rx", "age")])
tau=365.25*1
Delta=Inf.Cval.Delta(ovarian[, 1:2], covs0, covs1, tau, itr=200)
round(Delta, digits=3)
#          Est    SE Lower95 Upper95
# Model1 0.844 0.119  0.611  1.077
# Model0 0.659 0.148  0.369  0.949
# Delta  0.185 0.197  -0.201  0.572
</syntaxhighlight>
* [http://r.789695.n4.nabble.com/Comparing-differences-in-AUC-from-2-different-models-td858746.html Comparing differences in AUC from 2 different models]
==== Time dependent ROC curves ====
[https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/survcomp/versions/1.22.0/topics/tdrocc tdrocc()]
=== Prognostic markers vs predictive markers (and other biomarkers) ===
* '''[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prognosis_marker Prognostic marker]''' (某種疾病的危險因子) are biomarkers used to measure the progress of a disease in the patient sample. Prognostic markers are useful to stratify the patients into groups, guiding towards precise medicine discovery. They inform about likely disease outcome independent of the treatment received. See [http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3888208 Statistical and practical considerations for clinical evaluation of predictive biomarkers] by Mei-Yin Polley et al 2013.
* '''Predictive marker/treatment selection markers''' provide information about likely outcomes with application of specific interventions. See [http://annals.org/aim/fullarticle/746812/measuring-performance-markers-guiding-treatment-decisions Measuring the performance of markers for guiding treatment decisions] by Janes, et al 2011.
* [https://academic.oup.com/annonc/article/27/12/2160/2736334 Statistical controversies in clinical research: prognostic gene signatures are not (yet) useful in clinical practice] by Michiels 2016.
* Diagnostic biomarker, prognostic biomarker and predictive biomarkers. Disease-related biomarkers and drug-related biomarkers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biomarker_(medicine)
* Diagnostic biomarker, prognostic biomarker and predictive biomarkers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancer_biomarker
* '''Diagnostic''' (確定是某種疾病): diagnose conditions, as in the case of identifying early stage cancers
* [https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/sim.8091 Statistical methods for building better biomarkers of chronic kidney disease] by Pencina et al 2019.
=== Computation for gene expression (microarray) data ===
* [https://github.com/cran/survival survival] package (basic package, not designed for gene expression)
* [https://github.com/cran/GSA/blob/master/R/GSA.morefuns.R gsa] package
* [https://github.com/cran/samr/blob/master/R/samr.morefuns.R samr] package
* [https://github.com/cran/pamr/blob/master/R/pamr.survfuns.R pamr] package
* [http://www.bioconductor.org/packages/release/bioc/manuals/genefilter/man/genefilter.pdf#page=4 (Bioconductor) genefilter], [https://github.com/Bioconductor/genefilter/blob/master/R/all.R source]. genefilter() & coxfilter(). apply() was used.
* [https://github.com/cran/survcomp/blob/master/R/logpl.R logpl()] from [http://www.bioconductor.org/packages/release/bioc/vignettes/survcomp/inst/doc/survcomp.pdf#page=24 survcomp] package
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
n <- 500
g <- 10000
y <- rexp(n)
status <- ifelse(runif(n) < .7, 1, 0)
x <- matrix(rnorm(n*g), nr=g)
treat <- rbinom(n, 1, .5)
# Method 1
system.time(for(i in 1:g) coxph(Surv(y, status) ~ x[i, ] + treat + treat:x[i, ]))
# 28 seconds
# Method 2
system.time(apply(x, 1, function(z) coxph(Surv(y, status) ~ z + treat + treat:z)))
# 29 seconds
# Method 3 (Windows)
dyn.load("C:/Program Files (x86)/ArrayTools/Fortran/surv64.dll")  
tme <- y
sorted <- order(tme)
stime <- as.double(tme[sorted])
sstat <- as.integer(status[sorted])
x1 <- x[,sorted]
imodel <- 1  # imodel=1, fit univariate gene expression. Return p-values vector.
nvar <- 1
system.time(outx1 <- .Fortran("coxfitc", as.integer(n), as.integer(g), as.integer(0),
                stime, sstat, t(x1), as.double(0), as.integer(imodel),
                double(2*n+2*nvar*nvar+3*nvar), logdiff = double(g)))
# 1.69 seconds on R i386
# 0.79 seconds on R x64
# method 4: GSA
genenames=paste("g", 1:g, sep="")
#create some random gene sets
genesets=vector("list", 50)
for(i in 1:50){
  genesets[[i]]=paste("g", sample(1:g,size=30), sep="")
}
geneset.names=paste("set",as.character(1:50),sep="")
debug(GSA.func)
GSA.obj<-GSA(x,y, genenames=genenames, genesets=genesets, 
            censoring.status=status,
            resp.type="Survival", nperms=1)
Browse[3]> str(catalog.unique)
int [1:1401] 7943 227 4069 3011 8402 1586 2443 2777 673 9021 ...
Browse[3]> system.time(cox.func(x[catalog.unique,], y, censoring.status, s0=0))
# 1.3 seconds
Browse[2]> system.time(cox.func(x, y, censoring.status, s0=0))
# 7.259 seconds
</syntaxhighlight>
=== Single gene vs mult-gene survival models ===
[https://bmcbioinformatics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12859-018-2430-9 A comparative study of survival models for breast cancer prognostication revisited: the benefits of multi-gene models] by Grzadkowski et al 2018. To concordance of biomarker performance, the authors use the '''Concordance Correlation Coefficient (CCC)''' as introduced by Lin (1989) and further amended in Lin (2000).
=== Random papers using C-index, AUC or Brier scores ===
* [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4841879/pdf/IJPH-45-239.pdf Predicting the Survival Time for Bladder Cancer Using an Additive Hazards Model in Microarray Data] 2016. AUC, Brier scores and C-index were used
=== More ===
* This pdf file from [http://data.princeton.edu/pop509/NonParametricSurvival.pdf data.princeton.edu] contains estimation, hypothesis testing, time varying covariates and baseline survival estimation.
* [http://www.petrkeil.com/?p=2425 Survival analysis: basic terms, the exponential model, censoring, examples in R and JAGS]
* [https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/36015/prediction-in-cox-regression Survival analysis is not commonly used to predict future times to an event]. Cox model would require specification of the baseline hazard function.
== Logistic regression ==
=== Simulate binary data from the logistic model ===
https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/46523/how-to-simulate-artificial-data-for-logistic-regression
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
set.seed(666)
x1 = rnorm(1000)          # some continuous variables
x2 = rnorm(1000)
z = 1 + 2*x1 + 3*x2        # linear combination with a bias
pr = 1/(1+exp(-z))        # pass through an inv-logit function
y = rbinom(1000,1,pr)      # bernoulli response variable
#now feed it to glm:
df = data.frame(y=y,x1=x1,x2=x2)
glm( y~x1+x2,data=df,family="binomial")
</syntaxhighlight>
=== Building a Logistic Regression model from scratch ===
https://www.analyticsvidhya.com/blog/2015/10/basics-logistic-regression
=== Odds ratio ===
Calculate the odds ratio from the coefficient estimates; see [https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/8661/logistic-regression-in-r-odds-ratio this post].
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
require(MASS)
N  <- 100              # generate some data
X1 <- rnorm(N, 175, 7)
X2 <- rnorm(N,  30, 8)
X3 <- abs(rnorm(N, 60, 30))
Y  <- 0.5*X1 - 0.3*X2 - 0.4*X3 + 10 + rnorm(N, 0, 12)
# dichotomize Y and do logistic regression
Yfac  <- cut(Y, breaks=c(-Inf, median(Y), Inf), labels=c("lo", "hi"))
glmFit <- glm(Yfac ~ X1 + X2 + X3, family=binomial(link="logit"))
exp(cbind(coef(glmFit), confint(glmFit))) 
</syntaxhighlight>
== Medical applications ==
=== Subgroup analysis ===
Other related keywords: recursive partitioning, randomized clinical trials (RCT)
* [https://www.rdatagen.net/post/sub-group-analysis-in-rct/ Thinking about different ways to analyze sub-groups in an RCT]
* [http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/sim.7064/full Tutorial in biostatistics: data-driven subgroup identification and analysis in clinical trials] I Lipkovich, A Dmitrienko - Statistics in medicine, 2017
* Personalized medicine:Four perspectives of tailored medicine SJ Ruberg, L Shen - Statistics in Biopharmaceutical Research, 2015
* Berger, J. O., Wang, X., and Shen, L. (2014), “A Bayesian Approach to Subgroup Identification,” Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics, 24, 110–129.
* [https://rpsychologist.com/treatment-response-subgroup Change over time is not "treatment response"]
=== Interaction analysis ===
* Goal: '''assessing the predictiveness of biomarkers''' by testing their '''interaction (strength) with the treatment'''.
* [https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/sim.7608 Evaluation of biomarkers for treatment selection usingindividual participant data from multiple clinical trials] Kang et al 2018
* http://www.stat.purdue.edu/~ghobbs/STAT_512/Lecture_Notes/ANOVA/Topic_27.pdf#page=15. For survival data, y-axis is the survival time and B1=treatment, B2=control and X-axis is treatment-effect modifying score. But as seen on [http://www.stat.purdue.edu/~ghobbs/STAT_512/Lecture_Notes/ANOVA/Topic_27.pdf#page=16 page16], the effects may not be separated.
* [http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bimj.201500234/full Identification of biomarker-by-treatment interactions in randomized clinical trials with survival outcomes and high-dimensional spaces] N Ternès, F Rotolo, G Heinze, S Michiels - Biometrical Journal, 2017
* [https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/sim.6564 Designing a study to evaluate the benefitof a biomarker for selectingpatient treatment] Janes 2015
* [https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/pst.1728 A visualization method measuring theperformance of biomarkers for guidingtreatment decisions] Yang et al 2015. Predictiveness curves were used a lot.
* [https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/biom.12191 Combining Biomarkers to Optimize Patient TreatmentRecommendations] Kang et al 2014. Several simulations are conducted.
* [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24695044 An approach to evaluating and comparing biomarkers for patient treatment selection] Janes et al 2014
* [http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0272989X13493147 A Framework for Evaluating Markers Used to Select Patient Treatment] Janes et al 2014
* Tian, L., Alizaden, A. A., Gentles, A. J., and Tibshirani, R. (2014) “A Simple Method for Detecting Interactions Between a Treatment and a Large Number of Covariates,” and the [https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=2gG3CgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA79&ots=y5LqF3vk-T&sig=r2oaOxf9gcjK-1bvFHVyfvwscP8#v=onepage&q&f=true book chapter].
* [https://biostats.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1228&context=uwbiostat Statistical Methods for Evaluating and Comparing Biomarkers for Patient Treatment Selection] Janes et al 2013
* [https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/j.1541-0420.2011.01722.x Assessing Treatment-Selection Markers using a Potential Outcomes Framework] Huang et al 2012
* [https://biostats.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1223&context=uwbiostat Methods for Evaluating Prediction Performance of Biomarkers and Tests] Pepe et al 2012
* Measuring the performance of markers for guiding treatment decisions by Janes, et al 2011. <syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
cf <- c(2, 1, .5, 0)
f1 <- function(x) { z <- cf[1] + cf[3] + (cf[2]+cf[4])*x; 1/ (1 + exp(-z)) }
f0 <- function(x) { z <- cf[1] + cf[2]*x; 1/ (1 + exp(-z)) }
par(mfrow=c(1,3))
curve(f1, -3, 3, col = 'red', ylim = c(0, 1),
      ylab = '5-year DFS Rate', xlab = 'Marker A/D Value',
      main = 'Predictiveness Curve', lwd = 2)
curve(f0, -3, 3, col = 'black', ylim = c(0, 1),
      xlab = '', ylab = '', lwd = 2, add = TRUE)
legend(.5, .4, c("control", "treatment"),
      col = c("black", "red"), lwd = 2)
cf <- c(.1, 1, -.1, .5)
curve(f1, -3, 3, col = 'red', ylim = c(0, 1),
      ylab = '5-year DFS Rate', xlab = 'Marker G Value',
      main = 'Predictiveness Curve', lwd = 2)
curve(f0, -3, 3, col = 'black', ylim = c(0, 1),
      xlab = '', ylab = '', lwd = 2, add = TRUE)
legend(.5, .4, c("control", "treatment"),
      col = c("black", "red"), lwd = 2)
abline(v= - cf[3]/cf[4], lty = 2)
cf <- c(1, -1, 1, 2)
curve(f1, -3, 3, col = 'red', ylim = c(0, 1),
      ylab = '5-year DFS Rate', xlab = 'Marker B Value',
      main = 'Predictiveness Curve', lwd = 2)
curve(f0, -3, 3, col = 'black', ylim = c(0, 1),
      xlab = '', ylab = '', lwd = 2, add = TRUE)
legend(.5, .85, c("control", "treatment"),
      col = c("black", "red"), lwd = 2)
abline(v= - cf[3]/cf[4], lty = 2)
</syntaxhighlight> [[File:PredcurveLogit.svg|500px]]
* [https://www.degruyter.com/downloadpdf/j/ijb.2014.10.issue-1/ijb-2012-0052/ijb-2012-0052.pdf An Approach to Evaluating and Comparing Biomarkers for Patient Treatment Selection] The International Journal of Biostatistics by Janes, 2014. Y-axis is risk given marker, not P(T > t0|X). Good details.
* Gunter, L., Zhu, J., and Murphy, S. (2011), “Variable Selection for Qualitative Interactions in Personalized Medicine While Controlling the Family-Wise Error Rate,” Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics, 21, 1063–1078.
== Statistical Learning ==
* [http://statweb.stanford.edu/~tibs/ElemStatLearn/ Elements of Statistical Learning] Book homepage
* [http://heather.cs.ucdavis.edu/draftregclass.pdf From Linear Models to Machine Learning] by Norman Matloff
* [http://www.kdnuggets.com/2017/04/10-free-must-read-books-machine-learning-data-science.html 10 Free Must-Read Books for Machine Learning and Data Science]
* [https://towardsdatascience.com/the-10-statistical-techniques-data-scientists-need-to-master-1ef6dbd531f7 10 Statistical Techniques Data Scientists Need to Master]
*# Linear regression
*# Classification: Logistic Regression, Linear Discriminant Analysis, Quadratic Discriminant Analysis
*# Resampling methods: Bootstrapping and Cross-Validation
*# Subset selection: Best-Subset Selection, Forward Stepwise Selection, Backward Stepwise Selection, Hybrid Methods
*# Shrinkage/regularization: Ridge regression, Lasso
*# Dimension reduction: Principal Components Regression, Partial least squares
*# Nonlinear models: Piecewise function, Spline, generalized additive model
*# Tree-based methods: Bagging, Boosting, Random Forest
*# Support vector machine
*# Unsupervised learning: PCA, k-means, Hierarchical
* [https://www.listendata.com/2018/03/regression-analysis.html?m=1 15 Types of Regression you should know]
=== LDA, QDA ===
* [https://datascienceplus.com/how-to-perform-logistic-regression-lda-qda-in-r/ How to perform Logistic Regression, LDA, & QDA in R]
* [http://r-posts.com/discriminant-analysis-statistics-all-the-way/ Discriminant Analysis: Statistics All The Way]
=== Bagging ===
Chapter 8 of the book.
* Bootstrap mean is approximately a posterior average.
* Bootstrap aggregation or bagging average: Average the prediction over a collection of bootstrap samples, thereby reducing its variance. The bagging estimate is defined by
:<math>\hat{f}_{bag}(x) = \frac{1}{B}\sum_{b=1}^B \hat{f}^{*b}(x).</math>
[https://statcompute.wordpress.com/2016/01/02/where-bagging-might-work-better-than-boosting/ Where Bagging Might Work Better Than Boosting]
[https://freakonometrics.hypotheses.org/52777 CLASSIFICATION FROM SCRATCH, BAGGING AND FORESTS 10/8]
=== Boosting ===
* Ch8.2 Bagging, Random Forests and Boosting of [http://www-bcf.usc.edu/~gareth/ISL/ An Introduction to Statistical Learning] and the [http://www-bcf.usc.edu/~gareth/ISL/Chapter%208%20Lab.txt code].
* [http://freakonometrics.hypotheses.org/19874 An Attempt To Understand Boosting Algorithm]
* [http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/gbm/index.html gbm] package. An implementation of extensions to Freund and Schapire's '''AdaBoost algorithm''' and Friedman's '''gradient boosting machine'''. Includes regression methods for least squares, absolute loss, t-distribution loss, [http://mathewanalytics.com/2015/11/13/applied-statistical-theory-quantile-regression/ quantile regression], logistic, multinomial logistic, Poisson, Cox proportional hazards partial likelihood, AdaBoost exponential loss, Huberized hinge loss, and Learning to Rank measures (LambdaMart).
* https://www.biostat.wisc.edu/~kendzior/STAT877/illustration.pdf
* http://www.is.uni-freiburg.de/ressourcen/business-analytics/10_ensemblelearning.pdf and [http://www.is.uni-freiburg.de/ressourcen/business-analytics/homework_ensemblelearning_questions.pdf exercise]
* [https://freakonometrics.hypotheses.org/52782 Classification from scratch]
==== AdaBoost ====
AdaBoost.M1 by Freund and Schapire (1997):
The error rate on the training sample is
<math>
\bar{err} = \frac{1}{N} \sum_{i=1}^N I(y_i \neq G(x_i)),
</math>
Sequentially apply the weak classification algorithm to repeatedly modified versions of the data, thereby producing a sequence of weak classifiers <math>G_m(x), m=1,2,\dots,M.</math>
The predictions from all of them are combined through a weighted majority vote to produce the final prediction:
<math>
G(x) = sign[\sum_{m=1}^M \alpha_m G_m(x)].
</math>
Here <math> \alpha_1,\alpha_2,\dots,\alpha_M</math> are computed by the boosting algorithm and weight the contribution of each respective <math>G_m(x)</math>. Their effect is to give higher influence to the more accurate classifiers in the sequence.
==== Dropout regularization ====
[https://statcompute.wordpress.com/2017/08/20/dart-dropout-regularization-in-boosting-ensembles/ DART: Dropout Regularization in Boosting Ensembles]
==== Gradient boosting ====
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gradient_boosting
* [https://shirinsplayground.netlify.com/2018/11/ml_basics_gbm/ Machine Learning Basics - Gradient Boosting & XGBoost]
* [http://www.sthda.com/english/articles/35-statistical-machine-learning-essentials/139-gradient-boosting-essentials-in-r-using-xgboost/ Gradient Boosting Essentials in R Using XGBOOST]
=== Gradient descent ===
Gradient descent is a first-order iterative optimization algorithm for finding the minimum of a function ([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gradient_descent Wikipedia]).
* [https://spin.atomicobject.com/2014/06/24/gradient-descent-linear-regression/ An Introduction to Gradient Descent and Linear Regression] Easy to understand based on simple linear regression. Code is provided too.
* [http://gradientdescending.com/applying-gradient-descent-primer-refresher/ Applying gradient descent – primer / refresher]
* [http://sebastianruder.com/optimizing-gradient-descent/index.html An overview of Gradient descent optimization algorithms]
* [https://www.analyticsvidhya.com/blog/2016/01/complete-tutorial-ridge-lasso-regression-python/ A Complete Tutorial on Ridge and Lasso Regression in Python]
* How to choose the learning rate?
** [http://openclassroom.stanford.edu/MainFolder/DocumentPage.php?course=MachineLearning&doc=exercises/ex3/ex3.html Machine learning] from Andrew Ng
** http://scikit-learn.org/stable/modules/sgd.html
* R packages
** https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/gradDescent/index.html, https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/gradDescent/versions/2.0
** https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/sgd/index.html
The error function from a simple linear regression looks like
: <math>
\begin{align}
Err(m,b) &= \frac{1}{N}\sum_{i=1}^n (y_i - (m x_i + b))^2, \\
\end{align}
</math>
We compute the gradient first for each parameters.
: <math>
\begin{align}
\frac{\partial Err}{\partial m} &= \frac{2}{n} \sum_{i=1}^n -x_i(y_i - (m x_i + b)), \\
\frac{\partial Err}{\partial b} &= \frac{2}{n} \sum_{i=1}^n -(y_i - (m x_i + b))
\end{align}
</math>
The gradient descent algorithm uses an iterative method to update the estimates using a tuning parameter called '''learning rate'''.
<pre>
new_m &= m_current - (learningRate * m_gradient)
new_b &= b_current - (learningRate * b_gradient)
</pre>
After each iteration, derivative is closer to zero. [http://blog.hackerearth.com/gradient-descent-algorithm-linear-regression Coding in R] for the simple linear regression.
==== Gradient descent vs Newton's method ====
* [https://stackoverflow.com/a/12066869 What is the difference between Gradient Descent and Newton's Gradient Descent?]
* [http://www.santanupattanayak.com/2017/12/19/newtons-method-vs-gradient-descent-method-in-tacking-saddle-points-in-non-convex-optimization/ Newton's Method vs Gradient Descent Method in tacking saddle points in Non-Convex Optimization]
* [https://dinh-hung-tu.github.io/gradient-descent-vs-newton-method/ Gradient Descent vs Newton Method]
=== Classification and Regression Trees (CART) ===
==== Construction of the tree classifier ====
* Node proportion
:<math> p(1|t) + \dots + p(6|t) =1 </math> where <math>p(j|t)</math> define the node proportions (class proportion of class ''j'' on node ''t''. Here we assume there are 6 classes.
* Impurity of node t
:<math>i(t)</math> is a nonnegative function <math>\phi</math> of the <math>p(1|t), \dots, p(6|t)</math> such that <math> \phi(1/6,1/6,\dots,1/6)</math> = maximumm <math>\phi(1,0,\dots,0)=0, \phi(0,1,0,\dots,0)=0, \dots, \phi(0,0,0,0,0,1)=0</math>. That is, the node impurity is largest when all classes are equally mixed together in it, and smallest when the node contains only one class.
* Gini index of impurity
:<math>i(t) = - \sum_{j=1}^6 p(j|t) \log p(j|t).</math>
* Goodness of the split s on node t
:<math>\Delta i(s, t) = i(t) -p_Li(t_L) - p_Ri(t_R). </math> where <math>p_R</math> are the proportion of the cases in t go into the left node <math>t_L</math> and a proportion <math>p_R</math> go into right node <math>t_R</math>.
A tree was grown in the following way: At the root node <math>t_1</math>, a search was made through all candidate splits to find that split <math>s^*</math> which gave the largest decrease in impurity;
:<math>\Delta i(s^*, t_1) = \max_{s} \Delta i(s, t_1).</math>
* Class character of a terminal node was determined by the plurality rule. Specifically, if <math>p(j_0|t)=\max_j p(j|t)</math>, then ''t'' was designated as a class <math>j_0</math> terminal node.
==== R packages ====
* [http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/rpart/vignettes/longintro.pdf rpart]
* http://exploringdatablog.blogspot.com/2013/04/classification-tree-models.html
=== Partially additive (generalized) linear model trees ===
* https://eeecon.uibk.ac.at/~zeileis/news/palmtree/
* https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/palmtree/index.html
=== Supervised Classification, Logistic and Multinomial ===
* http://freakonometrics.hypotheses.org/19230
=== Variable selection ===
==== Review ====
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5969114/ Variable selection – A review and recommendations for the practicing statistician] by Heinze et al 2018.
==== Variable selection and variable importance plot ====
* http://freakonometrics.hypotheses.org/19835
==== Variable selection and cross-validation ====
* http://freakonometrics.hypotheses.org/19925
* http://ellisp.github.io/blog/2016/06/05/bootstrap-cv-strategies/
==== Mallow ''C<sub>p</sub>'' ====
Mallows's ''C<sub>p</sub>'' addresses the issue of overfitting. The Cp statistic calculated on a sample of data estimates the '''mean squared prediction error (MSPE)'''.
:<math>
E\sum_j (\hat{Y}_j - E(Y_j\mid X_j))^2/\sigma^2,
</math>
The ''C<sub>p</sub>'' statistic is defined as
:<math> C_p={SSE_p \over S^2} - N + 2P. </math>
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mallows%27s_Cp
* Used in Yuan & Lin (2006) group lasso. The degrees of freedom is estimated by the bootstrap or perturbation methods. Their paper mentioned the performance is comparable with that of 5-fold CV but is computationally much faster.
==== Variable selection for mode regression ====
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02664763.2017.1342781 Chen & Zhou, Journal of applied statistics ,June 2017
=== Neural network ===
* [http://junma5.weebly.com/data-blog/build-your-own-neural-network-classifier-in-r Build your own neural network in R]
* (Video) [https://youtu.be/ntKn5TPHHAk 10.2: Neural Networks: Perceptron Part 1 - The Nature of Code] from the Coding Train. The book [http://natureofcode.com/book/chapter-10-neural-networks/ THE NATURE OF CODE] by DANIEL SHIFFMAN
* [https://freakonometrics.hypotheses.org/52774 CLASSIFICATION FROM SCRATCH, NEURAL NETS]. The ROCR package was used to produce the ROC curve.
=== Support vector machine (SVM) ===
* [https://statcompute.wordpress.com/2016/03/19/improve-svm-tuning-through-parallelism/ Improve SVM tuning through parallelism] by using the '''foreach''' and '''doParallel''' packages.
=== Quadratic Discriminant Analysis (qda), KNN ===
[https://datarvalue.blogspot.com/2017/05/machine-learning-stock-market-data-part_16.html Machine Learning. Stock Market Data, Part 3: Quadratic Discriminant Analysis and KNN]
=== [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regularization_(mathematics) Regularization] ===
Regularization is a process of introducing additional information in order to solve an ill-posed problem or to prevent overfitting
==== Ridge regression ====
* [https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/52653/what-is-ridge-regression What is ridge regression?]
* [https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/118712/why-does-ridge-estimate-become-better-than-ols-by-adding-a-constant-to-the-diago Why does ridge estimate become better than OLS by adding a constant to the diagonal?] The estimates become more stable if the covariates are highly correlated.
* (In ridge regression) the matrix we need to invert no longer has determinant near zero, so the solution does not lead to uncomfortably large variance in the estimated parameters. And that’s a good thing. See [https://tamino.wordpress.com/2011/02/12/ridge-regression/ this post].
* [https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02664763.2018.1526891?journalCode=cjas20 Multicolinearity and ridge regression: results on type I errors, power and heteroscedasticity]
Since L2 norm is used in the regularization, ridge regression is also called L2 regularization.
[https://drsimonj.svbtle.com/ridge-regression-with-glmnet ridge regression with glmnet]
Hoerl and Kennard (1970a, 1970b) introduced ridge regression, which minimizes RSS subject to a constraint <math>\sum|\beta_j|^2 \le t</math>. Note that though ridge regression shrinks the OLS estimator toward 0 and yields a biased estimator <math>\hat{\beta} = (X^TX + \lambda X)^{-1} X^T y </math> where <math>\lambda=\lambda(t)</math>, a function of ''t'', the variance is smaller than that of the OLS estimator.
The solution exists if <math>\lambda >0</math> even if <math>n < p </math>.
Ridge regression (L2 penalty) only shrinks the coefficients. In contrast, Lasso method (L1 penalty) tries to shrink some coefficient estimators to exactly zeros. This can be seen from comparing the coefficient path plot from both methods.
Geometrically (contour plot of the cost function), the L1 penalty (the sum of absolute values of coefficients) will incur a probability of some zero coefficients (i.e. some coefficient hitting the corner of a diamond shape in the 2D case). For example, in the 2D case (X-axis=<math>\beta_0</math>, Y-axis=<math>\beta_1</math>), the shape of the L1 penalty <math>|\beta_0| + |\beta_1|</math> is a diamond shape whereas the shape of the L2 penalty (<math>\beta_0^2 + \beta_1^2</math>) is a circle.
==== Lasso/glmnet, adaptive lasso and FAQs ====
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lasso_(statistics). It has a discussion when two covariates are highly correlated. For example if gene <math>i</math> and gene <math>j</math> are identical, then the values of <math>\beta _{j}</math> and <math>\beta _{k}</math> that minimize the lasso objective function are not uniquely determined. Elastic Net has been designed to address this shortcoming.
** Strongly correlated covariates have similar regression coefficients, is referred to as the '''grouping''' effect. From the wikipedia page ''"one would like to find all the associated covariates, rather than selecting only one from each set of strongly correlated covariates, as lasso often does. In addition, selecting only a single covariate from each group will typically result in increased prediction error, since the model is less robust (which is why ridge regression often outperforms lasso)"''.
* [https://web.stanford.edu/~hastie/Papers/Glmnet_Vignette.pdf Glmnet Vignette]. It tries to minimize <math>RSS(\beta) + \lambda [(1-\alpha)||\beta||_2^2/2 + \alpha ||\beta||_1] </math>. The ''elastic-net'' penalty is controlled by <math>\alpha</math>, and bridge the gap between lasso (<math>\alpha = 1</math>) and ridge (<math>\alpha = 0</math>). Following is a CV curve (adaptive lasso) using the example from glmnet(). Two vertical lines are indicated: left one is '''lambda.min''' (that gives minimum mean cross-validated error) and right one is '''lambda.1se''' (the most ''regularized'' model such that error is within one standard error of the minimum). For the tuning parameter <math>\lambda</math>,
** The larger the <math>\lambda</math>, more coefficients are becoming zeros (think about '''coefficient path''' plots) and thus the simpler (more '''regularized''') the model.
** If <math>\lambda</math> becomes zero, it reduces to the regular regression and if <math>\lambda</math> becomes infinity, the coefficients become zeros.
** In terms of the bias-variance tradeoff, the larger the <math>\lambda</math>, the higher the bias and the lower the variance of the coefficient estimators.
[[File:Glmnetplot.svg|250px]]  [[File:Glmnet path.svg|280px]] [[File:Glmnet l1norm.svg|280px]]
: <syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
set.seed(1010)
n=1000;p=100
nzc=trunc(p/10)
x=matrix(rnorm(n*p),n,p)
beta=rnorm(nzc)
fx= x[,seq(nzc)] %*% beta
eps=rnorm(n)*5
y=drop(fx+eps)
px=exp(fx)
px=px/(1+px)
ly=rbinom(n=length(px),prob=px,size=1)
## Full lasso
set.seed(999)
cv.full <- cv.glmnet(x, ly, family='binomial', alpha=1, parallel=TRUE)
plot(cv.full)  # cross-validation curve and two lambda's
plot(glmnet(x, ly, family='binomial', alpha=1), xvar="lambda", label=TRUE) # coefficient path plot
plot(glmnet(x, ly, family='binomial', alpha=1))  # L1 norm plot
log(cv.full$lambda.min) # -4.546394
log(cv.full$lambda.1se) # -3.61605
sum(coef(cv.full, s=cv.full$lambda.min) != 0) # 44
## Ridge Regression to create the Adaptive Weights Vector
set.seed(999)
cv.ridge <- cv.glmnet(x, ly, family='binomial', alpha=0, parallel=TRUE)
wt <- 1/abs(matrix(coef(cv.ridge, s=cv.ridge$lambda.min)
                  [, 1][2:(ncol(x)+1)] ))^1 ## Using gamma = 1, exclude intercept
## Adaptive Lasso using the 'penalty.factor' argument
set.seed(999)
cv.lasso <- cv.glmnet(x, ly, family='binomial', alpha=1, parallel=TRUE, penalty.factor=wt)
# defautl type.measure="deviance" for logistic regression
plot(cv.lasso)
log(cv.lasso$lambda.min) # -2.995375
log(cv.lasso$lambda.1se) # -0.7625655
sum(coef(cv.lasso, s=cv.lasso$lambda.min) != 0) # 34
</syntaxhighlight>
* A list of potential lambdas: see [http://web.stanford.edu/~hastie/glmnet/glmnet_alpha.html#lin Linear Regression] case. The λ sequence is determined by '''lambda.max''' and '''lambda.min.ratio'''. The latter (default is ifelse(nobs<nvars,0.01,0.0001)) is the ratio of smallest value of the generated λ sequence (say ''lambda.min'') to  ''lambda.max''. The program then generated ''nlambda'' values linear on the log scale from ''lambda.max'' down to ''lambda.min''. ''lambda.max'' is not given, but easily computed from the input x and y; it is the smallest value for ''lambda'' such that all the coefficients are zero.
* [https://privefl.github.io/blog/choosing-hyper-parameters-in-penalized-regression/ Choosing hyper-parameters (α and λ) in penalized regression] by Florian Privé
* [https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/70249/feature-selection-model-with-glmnet-on-methylation-data-pn lambda.min vs lambda.1se]
** The '''lambda.1se''' represents the value of λ in the search that was simpler than the best model ('''lambda.min'''), but which has error within 1 standard error of the best model. In other words, using the value of ''lambda.1se'' as the selected value for λ results in a model that is slightly simpler than the best model but which cannot be distinguished from the best model in terms of error given the uncertainty in the k-fold CV estimate of the error of the best model.
** The '''lambda.min''' option refers to value of λ at the lowest CV error. The error at this value of λ is the average of the errors over the k folds and hence this estimate of the error is uncertain.
* https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/glmnet/versions/2.0-10/topics/glmnet
* [http://blog.revolutionanalytics.com/2016/11/glmnetutils.html glmnetUtils: quality of life enhancements for elastic net regression with glmnet]
* Mixing parameter: alpha=1 is the '''lasso penalty''', and alpha=0 the '''ridge penalty''' and anything between 0–1 is '''Elastic net'''.
** RIdge regression uses Euclidean distance/L2-norm as the penalty. It won't remove any variables.
** Lasso uses L1-norm as the penalty. Some of the coefficients may be shrunk exactly to zero.
* [https://www.quora.com/In-ridge-regression-and-lasso-what-is-lambda In ridge regression and lasso, what is lambda?]
** Lambda is a penalty coefficient. Large lambda will shrink the coefficients.
** cv.glment()$lambda.1se gives the most regularized model such that error is within one standard error of the minimum
* cv.glmnet() has a logical parameter '''parallel''' which is useful if a cluster or cores have been previously allocated
* [http://statweb.stanford.edu/~tibs/sta305files/Rudyregularization.pdf Ridge regression and the LASSO]
* Standard error/Confidence interval
** [https://www.reddit.com/r/statistics/comments/1vg8k0/standard_errors_in_glmnet/ Standard Errors in GLMNET] and [https://stackoverflow.com/questions/39750965/confidence-intervals-for-ridge-regression Confidence intervals for Ridge regression]
** '''[https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/penalized/vignettes/penalized.pdf#page=18 Why SEs are not meaningful and are usually not provided in penalized regression?]'''
**# Hint:  standard errors are not very meaningful for strongly biased estimates such as arise from penalized estimation methods.
**# '''Penalized estimation is a procedure that reduces the variance of estimators by introducing substantial bias.'''
**# The bias of each estimator is therefore a major component of its mean squared error, whereas its variance may contribute only a small part.
**# Any bootstrap-based calculations can only give an assessment of the variance of the estimates.
**# Reliable estimates of the bias are only available if reliable unbiased estimates are available, which is typically not the case in situations in which penalized estimates are used.
** [https://stats.stackexchange.com/tags/glmnet/hot Hottest glmnet questions from stackexchange].
** [https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/91462/standard-errors-for-lasso-prediction-using-r Standard errors for lasso prediction]. There might not be a consensus on a statistically valid method of calculating standard errors for the lasso predictions.
** [https://www4.stat.ncsu.edu/~lu/programcodes.html Code] for Adaptive-Lasso for Cox's proportional hazards model by Zhang & Lu (2007). This can compute the SE of estimates. The weights are originally based on the maximizers of the log partial likelihood. However, the beta may not be estimable in cases such as high-dimensional gene data, or the beta may be unstable if strong collinearity exists among covariates. In such cases, robust estimators such as ridge regression estimators would be used to determine the weights.
* LASSO vs Least angle regression
** https://web.stanford.edu/~hastie/Papers/LARS/LeastAngle_2002.pdf
** [http://web.stanford.edu/~hastie/TALKS/larstalk.pdf Least Angle Regression, Forward Stagewise and the Lasso]
** https://www.quora.com/What-is-Least-Angle-Regression-and-when-should-it-be-used
** [http://statweb.stanford.edu/~tibs/lasso/simple.html A simple explanation of the Lasso and Least Angle Regression]
** https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/4663/least-angle-regression-vs-lasso
** https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/lars/index.html
* '''Oracle property''' and '''adaptive lasso'''
** [http://www.stat.wisc.edu/~shao/stat992/fan-li2001.pdf Variable Selection via Nonconcave Penalized Likelihood and Its Oracle Properties], Fan & Li (2001) JASA
** [http://ricardoscr.github.io/how-to-adaptive-lasso.html Adaptive Lasso: What it is and how to implement in R]. Adaptive lasso weeks to minimize <math> RSS(\beta) + \lambda \sum_1^p \hat{\omega}_j |\beta_j| </math> where <math>\lambda</math> is the tuning parameter, <math>\hat{\omega}_j = \frac{1}{(|\hat{\beta}_j^{ini}|)^\gamma}</math> is the adaptive weights vector and <math>\hat{\beta}_j^{ini}</math> is an initial estimate of the coefficients obtained through ridge regression. '''Adaptive Lasso ends up penalizing more those coefficients with lower initial estimates.''' <math>\gamma</math> is a positive constant for adjustment of the adaptive weight vector, and the authors suggest the possible values of 0.5, 1 and 2.
** When n goes to infinity, <math>\hat{\omega}_j |\beta_j|  </math> converges to <math>I(\beta_j \neq 0) </math>. So the adaptive Lasso procedure can be regarded as an automatic implementation of best-subset selection in some asymptotic sense.
** [https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/229142/what-is-the-oracle-property-of-an-estimator What is the oracle property of an estimator?] An oracle estimator must be consistent in 1) '''variable selection''' and 2) '''consistent parameter estimation'''.
** (Linear regression) The adaptive lasso and its oracle properties Zou (2006, JASA)
** (Cox model) Adaptive-LASSO for Cox's proportional hazard model by Zhang and Lu (2007, Biometrika)
**[https://insightr.wordpress.com/2017/06/14/when-the-lasso-fails/ When the LASSO fails???]. Adaptive lasso is used to demonstrate its usefulness.
* [https://statisticaloddsandends.wordpress.com/2018/11/13/a-deep-dive-into-glmnet-penalty-factor/ A deep dive into glmnet: penalty.factor], [https://statisticaloddsandends.wordpress.com/2018/11/15/a-deep-dive-into-glmnet-standardize/ standardize], [https://statisticaloddsandends.wordpress.com/2019/01/09/a-deep-dive-into-glmnet-offset/ offset]
** Lambda sequence is not affected by the "penalty.factor"
** How "penalty.factor" used by the objective function may need to be corrected
* Some issues:
** With group of highly correlated features, Lasso tends to select amongst them arbitrarily.
** Often empirically ridge has better predictive performance than lasso but lasso leads to sparser solution
** Elastic-net (Zou & Hastie '05) aims to address these issues: hybrid between Lasso and ridge regression, uses L1 and L2 penalties.
* [https://statcompute.wordpress.com/2019/02/23/gradient-free-optimization-for-glmnet-parameters/ Gradient-Free Optimization for GLMNET Parameters]
* [https://bmcbioinformatics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12859-019-2656-1 Gsslasso Cox]: a Bayesian hierarchical model for predicting survival and detecting associated genes by incorporating pathway information, Tang et al BMC Bioinformatics 2019
==== Lasso logistic regression ====
https://freakonometrics.hypotheses.org/52894
==== Lagrange Multipliers ====
[https://medium.com/@andrew.chamberlain/a-simple-explanation-of-why-lagrange-multipliers-works-253e2cdcbf74 A Simple Explanation of Why Lagrange Multipliers Works]
==== How to solve lasso/convex optimization ====
* [https://web.stanford.edu/~boyd/cvxbook/bv_cvxbook.pdf Convex Optimization] by Boyd S, Vandenberghe L, Cambridge 2004. It is cited by Zhang & Lu (2007). The '''interior point algorithm''' can be used to solve the optimization problem in adaptive lasso.
* Review of '''gradient descent''':
** Finding maximum: <math>w^{(t+1)} = w^{(t)} + \eta \frac{dg(w)}{dw}</math>, where <math>\eta</math> is stepsize.
** Finding minimum: <math>w^{(t+1)} = w^{(t)} - \eta \frac{dg(w)}{dw}</math>.
** [https://stackoverflow.com/questions/12066761/what-is-the-difference-between-gradient-descent-and-newtons-gradient-descent What is the difference between Gradient Descent and Newton's Gradient Descent?] Newton's method requires <math>g''(w)</math>, more smoothness of g(.).
** Finding minimum for multiple variables ('''gradient descent'''): <math>w^{(t+1)} = w^{(t)} - \eta \Delta g(w^{(t)})</math>. For the least squares problem, <math>g(w) = RSS(w)</math>.
** Finding minimum for multiple variables in the least squares problem (minimize <math>RSS(w)</math>):  <math>\text{partial}(j) = -2\sum h_j(x_i)(y_i - \hat{y}_i(w^{(t)}), w_j^{(t+1)} = w_j^{(t)} - \eta \; \text{partial}(j)</math>
** Finding minimum for multiple variables in the ridge regression problem (minimize <math>RSS(w)+\lambda ||w||_2^2=(y-Hw)'(y-Hw)+\lambda w'w</math>): <math>\text{partial}(j) = -2\sum h_j(x_i)(y_i - \hat{y}_i(w^{(t)}), w_j^{(t+1)} = (1-2\eta \lambda) w_j^{(t)} - \eta \; \text{partial}(j)</math>. Compared to the closed form approach: <math>\hat{w} = (H'H + \lambda I)^{-1}H'y</math> where 1. the inverse exists even N<D as long as <math>\lambda > 0</math> and 2. the complexity of inverse is <math>O(D^3)</math>, D is the dimension of the covariates.
* '''Cyclical coordinate descent''' was used ([https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/glmnet/vignettes/glmnet_beta.pdf#page=1 vignette]) in the glmnet package. See also '''[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coordinate_descent coordinate descent]'''. The reason we call it 'descent' is because we want to 'minimize' an objective function.
** <math>\hat{w}_j = \min_w g(\hat{w}_1, \cdots, \hat{w}_{j-1},w, \hat{w}_{j+1}, \cdots, \hat{w}_D)</math>
** See [https://www.jstatsoft.org/article/view/v033i01 paper] on JSS 2010. The Cox PHM case also uses the cyclical coordinate descent method; see the [https://www.jstatsoft.org/article/view/v039i05 paper] on JSS 2011.
** Coursera's [https://www.coursera.org/learn/ml-regression/lecture/rb179/feature-selection-lasso-and-nearest-neighbor-regression Machine learning course 2: Regression] at 1:42. [http://web.stanford.edu/~hastie/TALKS/CD.pdf#page=12 Soft-thresholding] the coefficients is the key for the L1 penalty. The range for the thresholding is controlled by <math>\lambda</math>. Note to view the videos and all materials in coursera we can enroll to audit the course without starting a trial.
** No step size is required as in gradient descent.
** [https://sandipanweb.wordpress.com/2017/05/04/implementing-lasso-regression-with-coordinate-descent-and-the-sub-gradient-of-the-l1-penalty-with-soft-thresholding/ Implementing LASSO Regression with Coordinate Descent, Sub-Gradient of the L1 Penalty and Soft Thresholding in Python]
** Coordinate descent in the least squares problem: <math>\frac{\partial}{\partial w_j} RSS(w)= -2 \rho_j + 2 w_j</math>; i.e. <math>\hat{w}_j = \rho_j</math>.
** Coordinate descent in the Lasso problem (for normalized features): <math>
\hat{w}_j =
\begin{cases}
\rho_j + \lambda/2, & \text{if }\rho_j < -\lambda/2 \\
0, & \text{if } -\lambda/2 \le \rho_j \le \lambda/2\\
\rho_j- \lambda/2, & \text{if }\rho_j > \lambda/2
\end{cases}
</math>
** Choosing <math>\lambda</math> via cross validation tends to favor less sparse solutions and thus smaller <math>\lambda</math> then optimal choice for feature selection. See "Machine learning: a probabilistic perspective", Murphy 2012.
* Classical: Least angle regression (LARS) Efron et al 2004.
* [https://www.mathworks.com/help/stats/lasso.html?s_tid=gn_loc_drop Alternating Direction Method of Multipliers (ADMM)]. Boyd, 2011. “Distributed Optimization and Statistical Learning via the Alternating Direction Method of Multipliers.” Foundations and Trends in Machine Learning. Vol. 3, No. 1, 2010, pp. 1–122.
** https://stanford.edu/~boyd/papers/pdf/admm_slides.pdf
** [https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/ADMM/ ADMM] package
** [https://www.quora.com/Convex-Optimization-Whats-the-advantage-of-alternating-direction-method-of-multipliers-ADMM-and-whats-the-use-case-for-this-type-of-method-compared-against-classic-gradient-descent-or-conjugate-gradient-descent-method What's the advantage of alternating direction method of multipliers (ADMM), and what's the use case for this type of method compared against classic gradient descent or conjugate gradient descent method?]
* [https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/771585/convexity-of-lasso If some variables in design matrix are correlated, then LASSO is convex or not?]
* Tibshirani. [http://www.jstor.org/stable/2346178 Regression shrinkage and selection via the lasso] (free). JRSS B 1996.
* [http://www.econ.uiuc.edu/~roger/research/conopt/coptr.pdf Convex Optimization in R] by Koenker & Mizera 2014.
* [https://web.stanford.edu/~hastie/Papers/pathwise.pdf Pathwise coordinate optimization] by Friedman et al 2007.
* [http://web.stanford.edu/~hastie/StatLearnSparsity/ Statistical learning with sparsity: the Lasso and generalizations] T. Hastie, R. Tibshirani, and M. Wainwright, 2015 (book)
* Element of Statistical Learning (book)
* https://youtu.be/A5I1G1MfUmA StatsLearning Lect8h 110913
* Fu's (1998) shooting algorithm for Lasso ([http://web.stanford.edu/~hastie/TALKS/CD.pdf#page=11 mentioned] in the history of coordinate descent) and Zhang & Lu's (2007) modified shooting algorithm for adaptive Lasso.
* [https://www.cs.ubc.ca/~murphyk/MLbook/ Machine Learning: a Probabilistic Perspective] Choosing <math>\lambda</math> via cross validation tends to favor less sparse solutions and thus smaller <math>\lambda</math> than optimal choice for feature selection.
==== Quadratic programming ====
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadratic_programming
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lasso_(statistics)
* [https://cran.r-project.org/web/views/Optimization.html CRAN Task View: Optimization and Mathematical Programming]
* [https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/quadprog/ quadprog] package and [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/quadprog/versions/1.5-5/topics/solve.QP solve.QP()] function
* [https://rwalk.xyz/solving-quadratic-progams-with-rs-quadprog-package/ Solving Quadratic Progams with R’s quadprog package]
* [https://rwalk.xyz/more-on-quadratic-programming-in-r/ More on Quadratic Programming in R]
* https://optimization.mccormick.northwestern.edu/index.php/Quadratic_programming
* [https://rss.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/rssb.12273 Maximin projection learning for optimal treatment decision with heterogeneous individualized treatment effects] where the algorithm from [https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/7448814/ Lee] 2016 was used.
==== Highly correlated covariates ====
'''1. Elastic net'''
''' 2. Group lasso'''
* [http://pages.stat.wisc.edu/~myuan/papers/glasso.final.pdf Yuan and Lin 2006] JRSSB
* https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/gglasso/, http://royr2.github.io/2014/04/15/GroupLasso.html
* https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/grpreg/
* https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/grplasso/ by Lukas Meier ([http://people.ee.duke.edu/~lcarin/lukas-sara-peter.pdf paper]), used in the '''biospear''' package for survival data
* https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/SGL/index.html, http://royr2.github.io/2014/05/20/SparseGroupLasso.html, http://web.stanford.edu/~hastie/Papers/SGLpaper.pdf
==== Other Lasso ====
* [https://statisticaloddsandends.wordpress.com/2019/01/14/pclasso-a-new-method-for-sparse-regression/ pcLasso]
* [https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/630079v1 A Fast and Flexible Algorithm for Solving the Lasso in Large-scale and Ultrahigh-dimensional Problems] Qian et al 2019 and the [https://github.com/junyangq/snpnet snpnet] package
=== Comparison by plotting ===
If we are running simulation, we can use the [https://github.com/pbiecek/DALEX DALEX] package to visualize the fitting result from different machine learning methods and the true model. See http://smarterpoland.pl/index.php/2018/05/ml-models-what-they-cant-learn.
=== UMAP ===
* https://arxiv.org/abs/1802.03426
* https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2018/04/10/298430
* https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/umap/index.html
== Imbalanced Classification ==
* [https://www.analyticsvidhya.com/blog/2016/03/practical-guide-deal-imbalanced-classification-problems/ Practical Guide to deal with Imbalanced Classification Problems in R]
* [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4349800/ The Precision-Recall Plot Is More Informative than the ROC Plot When Evaluating Binary Classifiers on Imbalanced Datasets]
* [https://github.com/dariyasydykova/open_projects/tree/master/ROC_animation Roc animation]
== Deep Learning ==
* [https://bcourses.berkeley.edu/courses/1453965/wiki CS294-129 Designing, Visualizing and Understanding Deep Neural Networks] from berkeley.
* https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLkFD6_40KJIxopmdJF_CLNqG3QuDFHQUm
* [https://www.r-bloggers.com/deep-learning-from-first-principles-in-python-r-and-octave-part-5/ Deep Learning from first principles in Python, R and Octave – Part 5]
=== Tensor Flow (tensorflow package) ===
* https://tensorflow.rstudio.com/
* [https://youtu.be/atiYXm7JZv0 Machine Learning with R and TensorFlow] (Video)
* [https://developers.google.com/machine-learning/crash-course/ Machine Learning Crash Course] with TensorFlow APIs
* [http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2018/03/09/1717139115 Predicting cancer outcomes from histology and genomics using convolutional networks] Pooya Mobadersany et al, PNAS 2018
=== Biological applications ===
* [https://academic.oup.com/bioinformatics/article-abstract/33/22/3685/4092933 An introduction to deep learning on biological sequence data: examples and solutions]
=== Machine learning resources ===
[https://www.makeuseof.com/tag/machine-learning-courses/ These Machine Learning Courses Will Prepare a Career Path for You]
== Randomization inference ==
* Google: randomization inference in r
* [http://www.personal.psu.edu/ljk20/zeros.pdf Randomization Inference for Outcomes with Clumping at Zero], [https://amstat.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00031305.2017.1385535#.W09zpdhKg3E The American Statistician] 2018
* [https://jasonkerwin.com/nonparibus/2017/09/25/randomization-inference-vs-bootstrapping-p-values/ Randomization inference vs. bootstrapping for p-values]
== Bootstrap ==
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bootstrapping_%28statistics%29 Bootstrap] from Wikipedia.
** This contains an overview of different methods for computing bootstrap confidence intervals.
** [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/boot/versions/1.3-20/topics/boot.ci boot.ci()] from the 'boot' package provides a short explanation for different methods for computing bootstrap confidence intervals.
* [https://github.com/jtleek/slipper Bootstrapping made easy and tidy with slipper]
* [https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/bootstrap/ bootstrap] package. "An Introduction to the Bootstrap" by B. Efron and R. Tibshirani, 1993
* [https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/boot/ boot] package. Functions and datasets for bootstrapping from the book [https://books.google.com/books?id=_uKcAgAAQBAJ Bootstrap Methods and Their Application] by A. C. Davison and D. V. Hinkley (1997, CUP). A short course material can be found [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/37434447_Bootstrap_Methods_and_Their_Application here].The main functions are '''boot()''' and '''boot.ci()'''.
** https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/boot/versions/1.3-20
** [https://www.statmethods.net/advstats/bootstrapping.html R in Action] Nonparametric bootstrapping <syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
# Compute the bootstrapped 95% confidence interval for R-squared in the linear regression
rsq <- function(data, indices, formula) {
  d <- data[indices,] # allows boot to select sample
  fit <- lm(formula, data=d)
  return(summary(fit)$r.square)
} # 'formula' is optional depends on the problem
# bootstrapping with 1000 replications
set.seed(1234)
bootobject <- boot(data=mtcars, statistic=rsq, R=1000,
                  formula=mpg~wt+disp)
plot(bootobject) # or plot(bootobject, index = 1) if we have multiple statistics
ci <- boot.ci(bootobject, conf = .95, type=c("perc", "bca") )
    # default type is "all" which contains c("norm","basic", "stud", "perc", "bca").
    # 'bca' (Bias Corrected and Accelerated) by Efron 1987 uses
    # percentiles but adjusted to account for bias and skewness.
# Level    Percentile            BCa         
# 95%  ( 0.6838,  0.8833 )  ( 0.6344,  0.8549 )
# Calculations and Intervals on Original Scale
# Some BCa intervals may be unstable
ci$bca[4:5] 
# [1] 0.6343589 0.8549305
# the mean is not the same
mean(c(0.6838,  0.8833 ))
# [1] 0.78355
mean(c(0.6344,  0.8549 ))
# [1] 0.74465
summary(lm(mpg~wt+disp, data = mtcars))$r.square
# [1] 0.7809306
</syntaxhighlight>
** [https://www.r-project.org/doc/Rnews/Rnews_2002-3.pdf#page=2 Resampling Methods in R: The boot Package] by Canty
** [https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/0203/d0902185dd819bf38c8dacd077df0122b89d.pdf An introduction to bootstrap with applications with R] by Davison and Kuonen.
** http://people.tamu.edu/~alawing/materials/ESSM689/Btutorial.pdf
** http://statweb.stanford.edu/~tibs/sta305files/FoxOnBootingRegInR.pdf
** http://www.stat.wisc.edu/~larget/stat302/chap3.pdf
** https://www.stat.cmu.edu/~cshalizi/402/lectures/08-bootstrap/lecture-08.pdf. Variance, se, bias, confidence interval (basic, percentile), hypothesis testing, parametric & non-parametric bootstrap, bootstrapping regression models.
* http://www.math.ntu.edu.tw/~hchen/teaching/LargeSample/references/R-bootstrap.pdf  No package is used
* http://web.as.uky.edu/statistics/users/pbreheny/621/F10/notes/9-21.pdf Bootstrap confidence interval
* http://www-stat.wharton.upenn.edu/~stine/research/spida_2005.pdf
* Optimism corrected bootstrapping ([https://www4.stat.ncsu.edu/~lu/ST745/sim_modelchecking.pdf#page=12 Harrell et al 1996])
** [http://thestatsgeek.com/2014/10/04/adjusting-for-optimismoverfitting-in-measures-of-predictive-ability-using-bootstrapping/ Adjusting for optimism/overfitting in measures of predictive ability using bootstrapping]
** [https://intobioinformatics.wordpress.com/2018/12/25/optimism-corrected-bootstrapping-a-problematic-method/ Part 1]: Optimism corrected bootstrapping: a problematic method
** [https://intobioinformatics.wordpress.com/2018/12/26/part-2-optimism-corrected-bootstrapping-is-definitely-bias-further-evidence/ Part 2]: Optimism corrected bootstrapping is definitely bias, further evidence
** [https://intobioinformatics.wordpress.com/2018/12/27/part-3-two-more-implementations-of-optimism-corrected-bootstrapping-show-shocking-bias/ Part 3]: Two more implementations of optimism corrected bootstrapping show shocking bias
** [https://intobioinformatics.wordpress.com/2018/12/28/part-4-more-bias-and-why-does-bias-occur-in-optimism-corrected-bootstrapping/ Part 4]: Why does bias occur in optimism corrected bootstrapping?
** [https://intobioinformatics.wordpress.com/2018/12/29/part-5-corrections-to-optimism-corrected-bootstrapping-series-but-it-still-is-problematic/ Part 5]: Code corrections to optimism corrected bootstrapping series
=== Nonparametric bootstrap ===
This is the most common bootstrap method
[https://academic.oup.com/biostatistics/advance-article/doi/10.1093/biostatistics/kxy054/5106666 The upstrap] Crainiceanu & Crainiceanu, Biostatistics 2018
=== Parametric bootstrap ===
* Parametric bootstraps resample a known distribution function, whose parameters are estimated from your sample
* http://www.math.ntu.edu.tw/~hchen/teaching/LargeSample/notes/notebootstrap.pdf#page=3 No package is used
* [http://influentialpoints.com/Training/nonparametric-or-parametric_bootstrap.htm A parametric or non-parametric bootstrap?]
* https://www.stat.cmu.edu/~cshalizi/402/lectures/08-bootstrap/lecture-08.pdf#page=11
* [https://bioconductor.org/packages/release/bioc/vignettes/simulatorZ/inst/doc/simulatorZ-vignette.pdf simulatorZ] Bioc package
== Cross Validation ==
R packages:
* [https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/rsample/index.html rsample] (released July 2017)
* [https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/CrossValidate/index.html CrossValidate] (released July 2017)
=== Difference between CV & bootstrapping ===
[https://stats.stackexchange.com/a/18355 Differences between cross validation and bootstrapping to estimate the prediction error]
* CV tends to be less biased but K-fold CV has fairly large variance.
* Bootstrapping tends to drastically reduce the variance but gives more biased results (they tend to be pessimistic).
* The 632 and 632+ rules methods have been adapted to deal with the bootstrap bias
* Repeated CV does K-fold several times and averages the results similar to regular K-fold
=== .632 and .632+ bootstrap ===
* 0.632 bootstrap: Efron's paper [https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/2288636.pdf  Estimating the Error Rate of a Prediction Rule: Improvement on Cross-Validation] in 1983.
* 0.632+ bootstrap: The CV estimate of prediction error is nearly unbiased but can be highly variable. See [https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/01621459.1997.10474007 Improvements on Cross-Validation: The .632+ Bootstrap Method] by Efron and Tibshirani, JASA 1997.
* Chap 17.7 from "An Introduction to the Bootstrap" by Efron and Tibshirani. Chapman & Hall.
* Chap 7.4 (resubstitution error <math>\overline{err} </math>) and chap 7.11 (<math>Err_{boot(1)}</math>leave-one-out bootstrap estimate of prediction error) from "The Elements of Statistical Learning" by Hastie, Tibshirani and Friedman. Springer.
* [http://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/96739/what-is-the-632-rule-in-bootstrapping What is the .632 bootstrap]?
: <math>
Err_{.632} = 0.368 \overline{err} + 0.632 Err_{boot(1)}
</math>
* [https://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007/978-1-4419-9863-7_1328 Bootstrap, 0.632 Bootstrap, 0.632+ Bootstrap] from Encyclopedia of Systems Biology by Springer.
* bootpred() from bootstrap function.
* The .632 bootstrap estimate can be extended to statistics other than prediction error. See the paper [https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10543406.2016.1226329 Issues in developing multivariable molecular signatures for guiding clinical care decisions] by Sachs. [https://github.com/sachsmc/signature-tutorial Source code]. Let <math>\phi</math> be a performance metric, <math>S_b</math> a sample of size n from a bootstrap, <math>S_{-b}</math> subset of <math>S</math> that is disjoint from <math>S_b</math>; test set.
: <math>
\hat{E}^*[\phi_{\mathcal{F}}(S)] = .368 \hat{E}[\phi_{f}(S)] + 0.632 \hat{E}[\phi_{f_b}(S_{-b})]
</math>
: where <math>\hat{E}[\phi_{f}(S)]</math> is the naive estimate of <math>\phi_f</math> using the entire dataset.
* For survival data
** [https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/ROC632/ ROC632] package, [https://repositorium.sdum.uminho.pt/bitstream/1822/52744/1/paper4_final_version_CatarinaSantos_ACB.pdf Overview], and the paper [https://www.degruyter.com/view/j/sagmb.2012.11.issue-6/1544-6115.1815/1544-6115.1815.xml?format=INT Time Dependent ROC Curves for the Estimation of True Prognostic Capacity of Microarray Data] by Founcher 2012.
** [https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1541-0420.2007.00832.x Efron-Type Measures of Prediction Error for Survival Analysis] Gerds 2007.
** [https://academic.oup.com/bioinformatics/article/23/14/1768/188061 Assessment of survival prediction models based on microarray data] Schumacher 2007. Brier score.
** [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4194196/ Evaluating Random Forests for Survival Analysis using Prediction Error Curves] Mogensen, 2012. [https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/pec/ pec] package
** [https://bmcmedresmethodol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2288-12-102 Assessment of performance of survival prediction models for cancer prognosis] Chen 2012. Concordance, ROC... But bootstrap was not used.
** [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1672022916300390#b0150 Comparison of Cox Model Methods in A Low-dimensional Setting with Few Events] 2016. Concordance, calibration slopes RMSE are considered.
=== Create partitions ===
[http://r-exercises.com/2016/11/13/sampling-exercise-1/ set.seed(), sample.split(),createDataPartition(), and createFolds()] functions.
[https://drsimonj.svbtle.com/k-fold-cross-validation-with-modelr-and-broom k-fold cross validation with modelr and broom]
=== Nested resampling ===
* [http://appliedpredictivemodeling.com/blog/2017/9/2/njdc83d01pzysvvlgik02t5qnaljnd Nested Resampling with rsample]
* https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/292179/whats-the-meaning-of-nested-resampling
Nested resampling is need when we want to '''tuning a model''' by using a grid search. The default settings of a model are likely not optimal for each data set out. So an inner CV has to be performed with the aim to find the best parameter set of a learner for each fold.
See a diagram at https://i.stack.imgur.com/vh1sZ.png
In BRB-ArrayTools -> class prediction with multiple methods, the ''alpha'' (significant level of threshold used for gene selection, 2nd option in individual genes) can be viewed as a tuning parameter for the development of a classifier.
=== Pre-validation ===
* [https://www.degruyter.com/view/j/sagmb.2002.1.1/sagmb.2002.1.1.1000/sagmb.2002.1.1.1000.xml Pre-validation and inference in microarrays]  Tibshirani and Efron, Statistical Applications in Genetics and Molecular Biology, 2002.
* http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~tzheng/teaching/genetics/papers/tib_efron.pdf#page=5. In each CV, we compute the estimate of the response. This estimate of the response will serve as a new predictor ('''pre-validated predictor''') in the final fitting model.
* P1101 of Sachs 2016. With pre-validation, instead of computing the statistic <math>\phi</math> for each of the held-out subsets (<math>S_{-b}</math> for the bootstrap or <math>S_{k}</math> for cross-validation), the fitted signature <math>\hat{f}(X_i)</math> is estimated for <math>X_i \in S_{-b}</math> where <math>\hat{f}</math> is estimated using <math>S_{b}</math>. This process is repeated to obtain a set of '''pre-validated signature''' estimates <math>\hat{f}</math>. Then an association measure <math>\phi</math> can be calculated using the pre-validated signature estimates and the true outcomes <math>Y_i, i = 1, \ldots, n</math>.
* In CV, left-out samples = hold-out cases = test set
== Clustering ==
See [[Heatmap#Clustering|Clustering]].
== Mixed Effect Model ==
* Paper by [http://www.stat.cmu.edu/~brian/463/week07/laird-ware-biometrics-1982.pdf Laird and Ware 1982]
* [http://cran.r-project.org/doc/contrib/Fox-Companion/appendix-mixed-models.pdf John Fox's Linear Mixed Models] Appendix to An R and S-PLUS Companion to Applied Regression. Very clear. It provides 2 typical examples (hierarchical data and longitudinal data) of using the mixed effects model. It also uses Trellis plots to examine the data.
* Chapter 10 Random and Mixed Effects from Modern Applied Statistics with S by Venables and Ripley.
* (Book) lme4: Mixed-effects modeling with R by Douglas Bates.
* (Book) Mixed-effects modeling in S and S-Plus by José Pinheiro and Douglas Bates.
* [http://educate-r.org//2016/06/29/user2016.html Simulation and power analysis of generalized linear mixed models]
* [https://poissonisfish.wordpress.com/2017/12/11/linear-mixed-effect-models-in-r/ Linear mixed-effect models in R] by poissonisfish
* [https://www.statforbiology.com/2019/stat_general_correlationindependence2/ Dealing with correlation in designed field experiments]: part II
== Model selection criteria ==
* [http://r-video-tutorial.blogspot.com/2017/07/assessing-accuracy-of-our-models-r.html Assessing the Accuracy of our models (R Squared, Adjusted R Squared, RMSE, MAE, AIC)]
* [https://forecasting.svetunkov.ru/en/2018/03/22/comparing-additive-and-multiplicative-regressions-using-aic-in-r/ Comparing additive and multiplicative regressions using AIC in R]
* [https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00031305.2018.1459316?src=recsys Model Selection and Regression t-Statistics] Derryberry 2019
=== Akaike information criterion/AIC ===
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akaike_information_criterion.
:<math>\mathrm{AIC} \, = \, 2k - 2\ln(\hat L)</math>, where k be the number of estimated parameters in the model.
* Smaller is better
* Akaike proposed to approximate the expectation of the cross-validated log likelihood  <math>E_{test}E_{train} [log L(x_{test}| \hat{\beta}_{train})]</math> by <math>log L(x_{train} | \hat{\beta}_{train})-k </math>.
* Leave-one-out cross-validation is asymptotically equivalent to AIC, for ordinary linear regression models.
* AIC can be used to compare two models even if they are not hierarchically nested.
* [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/stats/versions/3.6.0/topics/AIC AIC()] from the stats package.
=== BIC ===
:<math>\mathrm{BIC} \, = \, \ln(n) \cdot 2k - 2\ln(\hat L)</math>, where k be the number of estimated parameters in the model.
=== Overfitting ===
[https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/81576/how-to-judge-if-a-supervised-machine-learning-model-is-overfitting-or-not How to judge if a supervised machine learning model is overfitting or not?]
=== AIC vs AUC ===
[https://stats.stackexchange.com/a/51278 What is the difference in what AIC and c-statistic (AUC) actually measure for model fit?]
Roughly speaking:
* AIC is telling you how good your model fits for a specific mis-classification cost.
* AUC is telling you how good your model would work, on average, across all mis-classification costs.
'''Frank Harrell''': AUC (C-index) has the advantage of measuring the concordance probability as you stated, aside from cost/utility considerations. To me the bottom line is the AUC should be used to describe discrimination of one model, not to compare 2 models. For comparison we need to use the most powerful measure: deviance and those things derived from deviance: generalized 𝑅<sup>2</sup> and AIC.
== Entropy ==
=== Definition ===
Entropy is defined by -log2(p) where p is a probability. '''Higher entropy represents higher unpredictable of an event'''.
Some examples:
* Fair 2-side die: Entropy = -.5*log2(.5) - .5*log2(.5) = 1.
* Fair 6-side die: Entropy = -6*1/6*log2(1/6) = 2.58
* Weighted 6-side die: Consider pi=.1 for i=1,..,5 and p6=.5. Entropy = -5*.1*log2(.1) - .5*log2(.5) = 2.16 (less unpredictable than a fair 6-side die).
=== Use ===
When entropy was applied to the variable selection, we want to select a class variable which gives a largest entropy difference between without any class variable (compute entropy using response only) and with that class variable (entropy is computed by adding entropy in each class level) because this variable is most discriminative and it gives most '''information gain'''. For example,
* entropy (without any class)=.94,
* entropy(var 1) = .69,
* entropy(var 2)=.91,
* entropy(var 3)=.725.
We will choose variable 1 since it gives the largest gain (.94 - .69) compared to the other variables (.94 -.91, .94 -.725).
Why is picking the attribute with the most information gain beneficial? It ''reduces'' entropy, which increases predictability. A decrease in entropy signifies an decrease in unpredictability, which also means an increase in predictability.
Consider a split of a continuous variable. Where should we cut the continuous variable to create a binary partition with the highest gain? Suppose cut point c1 creates an entropy .9 and another cut point c2 creates an entropy .1. We should choose c2.
=== Related ===
In addition to information gain, gini (dʒiːni) index is another metric used in decision tree. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decision_tree_learning wikipedia page] about decision tree learning.
== Ensembles ==
Combining classifiers. Pro: better classification performance. Con: time consuming.
Comic http://flowingdata.com/2017/09/05/xkcd-ensemble-model/
=== Bagging ===
Draw N bootstrap samples and summary the results (averaging for regression problem, majority vote for classification problem). Decrease variance without changing bias. Not help much with underfit or high bias models.
==== Random forest ====
'''Variance importance''': if you scramble the values of a variable, and the accuracy of your tree does not change much, then the variable is not very important.
Why is it useful to compute variance importance? So the model's predictions are easier to interpret (not improve the prediction performance).
Random forest has advantages of easier to run in parallel and suitable for small n large p problems.
[https://bmcbioinformatics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12859-018-2264-5 Random forest versus logistic regression: a large-scale benchmark experiment] by Raphael Couronné, BMC Bioinformatics 2018
[https://github.com/suiji/arborist Arborist]: Parallelized, Extensible Random Forests
=== Boosting ===
Instead of selecting data points randomly with the boostrap, it favors the misclassified points.
Algorithm:
* Initialize the weights
* Repeat
** resample with respect to weights
** retrain the model
** recompute weights
Since boosting requires computation in iterative and bagging can be run in parallel, bagging has an advantage over boosting when the data is very large.
=== Time series ===
[https://petolau.github.io/Ensemble-of-trees-for-forecasting-time-series/ Ensemble learning for time series forecasting in R]
== p-values ==
===  p-values ===
* Prob(Data | H0)
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P-value
* [https://amstat.tandfonline.com/toc/utas20/73/sup1 Statistical Inference in the 21st Century: A World Beyond p < 0.05] The American Statistician, 2019
* [https://matloff.wordpress.com/2016/03/07/after-150-years-the-asa-says-no-to-p-values/ THE ASA SAYS NO TO P-VALUES] The problem is that with large samples, significance tests pounce on tiny, unimportant departures from the null hypothesis. We have the opposite problem with small samples: The power of the test is low, and we will announce that there is “no significant effect” when in fact we may have too little data to know whether the effect is important.
* [http://www.r-statistics.com/2016/03/its-not-the-p-values-fault-reflections-on-the-recent-asa-statement/ It’s not the p-values’ fault]
* [https://stablemarkets.wordpress.com/2016/05/21/exploring-p-values-with-simulations-in-r/ Exploring P-values with Simulations in R] from Stable Markets.
* p-value and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effect_size effect size]. http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1745691614553988
=== Distribution of p values in medical abstracts ===
* http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26608725
* [https://github.com/jtleek/tidypvals An R package with several million published p-values in tidy data sets] by Jeff Leek.
=== nominal p-value and Empirical p-values ===
* Nominal p-values are based on asymptotic null distributions
* Empirical p-values are computed from simulations/permutations
=== (nominal) alpha level ===
Conventional methodology for statistical testing is, in advance of undertaking the test, to set a NOMINAL ALPHA CRITERION LEVEL (often 0.05). The outcome is classified as showing STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE if the actual ALPHA (probability of the outcome under the null hypothesis) is no greater than this NOMINAL ALPHA CRITERION LEVEL.
* http://www.translationdirectory.com/glossaries/glossary033.htm
* http://courses.washington.edu/p209s07/lecturenotes/Week%205_Monday%20overheads.pdf
=== Normality assumption ===
[https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2018/12/20/498931 Violating the normality assumption may be the lesser of two evils]
== T-statistic ==
Let <math style="vertical-align:-.3em">\scriptstyle\hat\beta</math> be an [[estimator]] of parameter ''β'' in some [[statistical model]]. Then a '''''t''-statistic''' for this parameter is any quantity of the form
: <math>
    t_{\hat{\beta}} = \frac{\hat\beta - \beta_0}{\mathrm{s.e.}(\hat\beta)},
  </math>
where ''β''<sub>0</sub> is a non-random, known constant, and <math style="vertical-align:-.3em">\scriptstyle s.e.(\hat\beta)</math> is the [[standard error (statistics)|standard error]] of the estimator <math style="vertical-align:-.3em">\scriptstyle\hat\beta</math>.
=== Two sample test assuming equal variance ===
* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pooled_variance Pooled variance]
* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Student%27s_t-test Student's t-test]
The ''t'' statistic (df = <math> n_1 + n_2 - 2</math>) to test whether the means are different can be calculated as follows:
:<math>t = \frac{\bar {X}_1 - \bar{X}_2}{s_{X_1X_2} \cdot \sqrt{\frac{1}{n_1}+\frac{1}{n_2}}}</math>
where
:<math> s_{X_1X_2} = \sqrt{\frac{(n_1-1)s_{X_1}^2+(n_2-1)s_{X_2}^2}{n_1+n_2-2}}.</math>
<math>s_{X_1X_2}</math> is an estimator of the common/pooled [[standard deviation]] of the two samples. The square-root of a pooled variance estimator is known as a pooled standard deviation.
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pooled_variance Pooled variance] from Wikipedia
* The pooled sample variance is an unbiased estimator of the common variance if Xi and Yi are following the normal distribution.
* (From [https://support.minitab.com/en-us/minitab/18/help-and-how-to/statistics/basic-statistics/supporting-topics/data-concepts/what-is-the-pooled-standard-deviation/ minitab]) The pooled standard deviation is the average spread of all data points about their group mean (''not the overall mean''). It is a weighted average of each group's standard deviation. The weighting gives larger groups a proportionally greater effect on the overall estimate.
* [https://heuristicandrew.blogspot.com/2018/01/type-i-error-rates-in-two-sample-t-test.html Type I error rates in two-sample t-test by simulation]
=== Two sample test assuming unequal variance ===
The ''t'' statistic (Behrens-Welch test statistic) to test whether the population means are different is calculated as:
:<math>t = {\overline{X}_1 - \overline{X}_2 \over s_{\overline{X}_1 - \overline{X}_2}}</math>
where
:<math>s_{\overline{X}_1 - \overline{X}_2} = \sqrt{{s_1^2 \over n_1} + {s_2^2  \over n_2}}.
</math>
Here ''s''<sup>2</sup> is the [[unbiased estimator]] of the [[variance]] of the two samples.
The degrees of freedom is evaluated using the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welch%E2%80%93Satterthwaite_equation Satterthwaite's approximation]
:<math>df = { ({s_1^2 \over n_1} + {s_2^2 \over n_2})^2  \over {({s_1^2 \over n_1})^2 \over n_1-1} + {({s_2^2 \over n_2})^2 \over n_2-1} }. </math>
=== Paired test ===
[https://www.rdatagen.net/post/thinking-about-the-run-of-the-mill-pre-post-analysis/ Have you ever asked yourself, "how should I approach the classic pre-post analysis?"]
=== [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_score Z-value/Z-score] ===
If the population parameters are known, then rather than computing the t-statistic, one can compute the z-score.
=== Nonparametric test: Wilcoxon rank sum test ===
Sensitive to differences in location
=== Nonparametric test: Kolmogorov-Smirnov test ===
Sensitive to difference in shape and location of the distribution functions of two groups
=== Limma: Empirical Bayes method ===
* Some Bioconductor packages: limma, RnBeads, IMA, minfi packages.
* The '''moderated T-statistics''' used in Limma is defined on Limma's [https://bioconductor.org/packages/release/bioc/vignettes/limma/inst/doc/usersguide.pdf#page=63 user guide].
* Diagram of usage [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/limma/versions/3.28.14/topics/makeContrasts ?makeContrasts], [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/limma/versions/3.28.14/topics/contrasts.fit ?contrasts.fit], [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/limma/versions/3.28.14/topics/ebayes ?eBayes] <syntaxhighlight>
          lmFit        contrasts.fit          eBayes      topTable
        x ------> fit ------------------> fit2  -----> fit2  --------->
                  ^                      ^
                  |                      |
    model.matrix  |    makeContrasts      |
class ---------> design ----------> contrasts
</syntaxhighlight>
* Examples of contrasts (search '''contrasts.fit''' and/or '''model.matrix''' from the user guide) <syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
# Ex 1 (Single channel design):
design <- model.matrix(~ 0+factor(c(1,1,1,2,2,3,3,3))) # number of samples x number of groups
colnames(design) <- c("group1", "group2", "group3")
fit <- lmFit(eset, design)
contrast.matrix <- makeContrasts(group2-group1, group3-group2, group3-group1,
                                levels=design)        # number of groups x number of contrasts
fit2 <- contrasts.fit(fit, contrast.matrix)
fit2 <- eBayes(fit2)
topTable(fit2, coef=1, adjust="BH")
topTable(fit2, coef=1, sort = "none", n = Inf, adjust="BH")$adj.P.Val
# Ex 2 (Common reference design):
targets <- readTargets("runxtargets.txt")
design <- modelMatrix(targets, ref="EGFP")
contrast.matrix <- makeContrasts(AML1,CBFb,AML1.CBFb,AML1.CBFb-AML1,AML1.CBFb-CBFb,
                                levels=design)
fit <- lmFit(MA, design)
fit2 <- contrasts.fit(fit, contrasts.matrix)
fit2 <- eBayes(fit2)
# Ex 3 (Direct two-color design):
design <- modelMatrix(targets, ref="CD4")
contrast.matrix <- cbind("CD8-CD4"=c(1,0),"DN-CD4"=c(0,1),"CD8-DN"=c(1,-1))
rownames(contrast.matrix) <- colnames(design)
fit <- lmFit(eset, design)
fit2 <- contrasts.fit(fit, contrast.matrix)
# Ex 4 (Single channel + Two groups):
fit <- lmFit(eset, design)
cont.matrix <- makeContrasts(MUvsWT=MU-WT, levels=design)
fit2 <- contrasts.fit(fit, cont.matrix)
fit2 <- eBayes(fit2)
# Ex 5 (Single channel + Several groups):
f <- factor(targets$Target, levels=c("RNA1","RNA2","RNA3"))
design <- model.matrix(~0+f)
colnames(design) <- c("RNA1","RNA2","RNA3")
fit <- lmFit(eset, design)
contrast.matrix <- makeContrasts(RNA2-RNA1, RNA3-RNA2, RNA3-RNA1,
                                levels=design)
fit2 <- contrasts.fit(fit, contrast.matrix)
fit2 <- eBayes(fit2)
# Ex 6 (Single channel + Interaction models 2x2 Factorial Designs) :
cont.matrix <- makeContrasts(
  SvsUinWT=WT.S-WT.U,
  SvsUinMu=Mu.S-Mu.U,
  Diff=(Mu.S-Mu.U)-(WT.S-WT.U),
  levels=design)
fit2 <- contrasts.fit(fit, cont.matrix)
fit2 <- eBayes(fit2)
</syntaxhighlight>
* Example from user guide 17.3 (Mammary progenitor cell populations) <syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
setwd("~/Downloads/IlluminaCaseStudy")
url <- c("http://bioinf.wehi.edu.au/marray/IlluminaCaseStudy/probe%20profile.txt.gz",
  "http://bioinf.wehi.edu.au/marray/IlluminaCaseStudy/control%20probe%20profile.txt.gz",
  "http://bioinf.wehi.edu.au/marray/IlluminaCaseStudy/Targets.txt")
for(i in url)  system(paste("wget ", i))
system("gunzip probe%20profile.txt.gz")
system("gunzip control%20probe%20profile.txt.gz")
source("http://www.bioconductor.org/biocLite.R")
biocLite("limma")
biocLite("statmod")
library(limma)
targets <- readTargets()
targets
x <- read.ilmn(files="probe profile.txt",ctrlfiles="control probe profile.txt",
  other.columns="Detection")
options(digits=3)
head(x$E)
boxplot(log2(x$E),range=0,ylab="log2 intensity")
y <- neqc(x)
dim(y)
expressed <- rowSums(y$other$Detection < 0.05) >= 3
y <- y[expressed,]
dim(y) # 24691 12
plotMDS(y,labels=targets$CellType)
ct <- factor(targets$CellType)
design <- model.matrix(~0+ct)
colnames(design) <- levels(ct)
dupcor <- duplicateCorrelation(y,design,block=targets$Donor) # need statmod
dupcor$consensus.correlation
fit <- lmFit(y, design, block=targets$Donor, correlation=dupcor$consensus.correlation)
contrasts <- makeContrasts(ML-MS, LP-MS, ML-LP, levels=design)
fit2 <- contrasts.fit(fit, contrasts)
fit2 <- eBayes(fit2, trend=TRUE)
summary(decideTests(fit2, method="global"))
topTable(fit2, coef=1) # Top ten differentially expressed probes between ML and MS
#                SYMBOL TargetID logFC AveExpr    t  P.Value adj.P.Val    B
# ILMN_1766707    IL17B    <NA> -4.19    5.94 -29.0 2.51e-12  5.19e-08 18.1
# ILMN_1706051      PLD5    <NA> -4.00    5.67 -27.8 4.20e-12  5.19e-08 17.7
# ...
tT <- topTable(fit2, coef=1, number = Inf)
dim(tT)
# [1] 24691    8
</syntaxhighlight>
* Three groups comparison (What is the difference of A vs Other AND A vs (B+C)/2?). [https://grokbase.com/t/r/bioconductor/092bnp4147/bioc-limma-contrasts-comparing-one-factor-to-multiple-others Contrasts comparing one factor to multiple others] <syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
library(limma)
set.seed(1234)
n <- 100
testexpr <- matrix(rnorm(n * 10, 5, 1), nc= 10)
testexpr[, 6:7] <- testexpr[, 6:7] + 7  # mean is 12
design1 <- model.matrix(~ 0 + as.factor(c(rep(1,5),2,2,3,3,3)))
design2 <- matrix(c(rep(1,5),rep(0,5),rep(0,5),rep(1,5)),ncol=2)
colnames(design1) <- LETTERS[1:3]
colnames(design2) <- c("A", "Other")
fit1 <- lmFit(testexpr,design1)
contrasts.matrix1 <- makeContrasts("AvsOther"=A-(B+C)/2, levels = design1)
fit1 <- eBayes(contrasts.fit(fit1,contrasts=contrasts.matrix1))
fit2 <- lmFit(testexpr,design2)
contrasts.matrix2 <- makeContrasts("AvsOther"=A-Other, levels = design2)
fit2 <- eBayes(contrasts.fit(fit2,contrasts=contrasts.matrix2))
t1 <- topTable(fit1,coef=1, number = Inf)
t2 <- topTable(fit2,coef=1, number = Inf)
rbind(head(t1, 3), tail(t1, 3))
#        logFC  AveExpr        t      P.Value    adj.P.Val        B
# 92 -5.293932 5.810926 -8.200138 1.147084e-15 1.147084e-13 26.335702
# 81 -5.045682 5.949507 -7.815607 2.009706e-14 1.004853e-12 23.334600
# 37 -4.720906 6.182821 -7.312539 7.186627e-13 2.395542e-11 19.625964
# 27 -2.127055 6.854324 -3.294744 1.034742e-03 1.055859e-03 -1.141991
# 86 -1.938148 7.153142 -3.002133 2.776390e-03 2.804434e-03 -2.039869
# 75 -1.876490 6.516004 -2.906626 3.768951e-03 3.768951e-03 -2.314869
rbind(head(t2, 3), tail(t2, 3))
#        logFC  AveExpr          t    P.Value adj.P.Val        B
# 92 -4.518551 5.810926 -2.5022436 0.01253944 0.2367295 -4.587080
# 81 -4.500503 5.949507 -2.4922492 0.01289503 0.2367295 -4.587156
# 37 -4.111158 6.182821 -2.2766414 0.02307100 0.2367295 -4.588728
# 27 -1.496546 6.854324 -0.8287440 0.40749644 0.4158127 -4.595601
# 86 -1.341607 7.153142 -0.7429435 0.45773401 0.4623576 -4.595807
# 75 -1.171366 6.516004 -0.6486690 0.51673851 0.5167385 -4.596008
var(as.numeric(testexpr[, 6:10]))
# [1] 12.38074
var(as.numeric(testexpr[, 6:7]))
# [1] 0.8501378
var(as.numeric(testexpr[, 8:10]))
# [1] 0.9640699
</syntaxhighlight> As we can see the p-values returned from the first contrast are very small (large mean but small variance) but the p-values returned from the 2nd contrast are large (still large mean but very large variance). The variance from the "Other" group can be calculated from a mixture distribution ( pdf = .4 N(12, 1) + .6 N(5, 1), VarY = E(Y^2) - (EY)^2 where E(Y^2) = .4 (VarX1 + (EX1)^2) + .6 (VarX2 + (EX2)^2) = 73.6 and EY = .4 * 12 + .6 * 5 = 7.8; so VarY = 73.6 - 7.8^2 = 12.76).
* [https://support.bioconductor.org/p/67984/ Correct assumptions of using limma moderated t-test] and the paper [http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0012336 Should We Abandon the t-Test in the Analysis of Gene Expression Microarray Data: A Comparison of Variance Modeling Strategies].
** Evaluation: statistical power (figure 3, 4, 5), false-positive rate (table 2), execution time and ease of use (table 3)
** Limma presents several advantages
** RVM inflates the expected number of false-positives when sample size is small. On the other hand the, RVM is very close to Limma from either their formulas (p3 of the supporting info) or the Hierarchical clustering (figure 2) of two examples.
** [https://www.slideshare.net/nahla0tammam/b4-jeanmougin Slides]
* [https://support.bioconductor.org/p/80398/ Use Limma to run ordinary T tests] <syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
# where 'fit' is the output from lmFit() or contrasts.fit().
unmod.t <- fit$coefficients/fit$stdev.unscaled/fit$sigma
pval <- 2*pt(-abs(unmod.t), fit$df.residual)
# Following the above example
t.test(testexpr[1, 1:5], testexpr[1, 6:10], var.equal = T)
# Two Sample t-test
#
# data:  testexpr[1, 1:5] and testexpr[1, 6:10]
# t = -1.2404, df = 8, p-value = 0.25
# alternative hypothesis: true difference in means is not equal to 0
# 95 percent confidence interval:
#  -7.987791  2.400082
# sample estimates:
#  mean of x mean of y
# 4.577183  7.371037
fit2$coefficients[1] / (fit2$stdev.unscaled[1] * fit2$sigma[1]) # Ordinary t-statistic
# [1] -1.240416
fit2$coefficients[1] / (fit2$stdev.unscaled[1] * sqrt(fit2$s2.post[1])) # moderated t-statistic
# [1] -1.547156
topTable(fit2,coef=1, sort.by = "none")[1,]
#      logFC  AveExpr        t  P.Value adj.P.Val        B
# 1 -2.793855 5.974110 -1.547156 0.1222210 0.2367295 -4.592992
# Square root of the pooled variance
fit2$sigma[1]
# [1] 3.561284
(((5-1)*var(testexpr[1, 1:5]) + (5-1)*var(testexpr[1, 6:10]))/(5+5-2)) %>% sqrt()
# [1] 3.561284   
</syntaxhighlight>
* Comparison of ordinary T-statistic, RVM T-statistic and Limma/eBayes moderated T-statistic.
{| class="wikitable"
|-
!  !! Test statistic for gene g !!
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Student%27s_t-test#Equal_or_unequal_sample_sizes,_equal_variance Ordinary T-test] || <math> \frac{\overline{y}_{g1} - \overline{y}_{g2}}{S_g^{Pooled}/\sqrt{1/n_1 + 1/n_2}}</math> || <math>(S_g^{Pooled})^2 = \frac{(n_1-1)S_{g1}^2 + (n_2-1)S_{g2}^2}{n1+n2-2} </math>
|-
| [https://academic.oup.com/bioinformatics/article/19/18/2448/194552 RVM] || <math> \frac{\overline{y}_{g1} - \overline{y}_{g2}}{S_g^{RVM}/\sqrt{1/n_1 + 1/n_2}}</math> || <math>(S_g^{RVM})^2 = \frac{(n_1+n_2-2)S_{g}^2 + 2*a*(a*b)^{-1}}{n1+n2-2+2*a} </math>
|-
| Limma || <math> \frac{\overline{y}_{g1} - \overline{y}_{g2}}{S_g^{Limma}/\sqrt{1/n_1 + 1/n_2}}</math> || <math>(S_g^{Limma})^2 = \frac{d_0 S_0^2 + d_g S_g^2}{d_0 + d_g} </math>
|}
* In Limma,
** <math>\sigma_g^2</math> assumes an inverse Chi-square distribution with mean <math>S_0^2</math> and <math>d_0</math> degrees of freedom
** <math>d_0</math> (fit$df.prior) and <math>d_g</math> are, respectively, prior and residual/empirical degrees of freedom.
** <math>S_0^2</math> (fit$s2.prior) is the prior distribution and <math>S_g^2</math> is the pooled variance.
** <math>(S_g^{Limma})^2</math> can be obtained from fit$s2.post.
* [https://arxiv.org/abs/1901.10679 Empirical Bayes estimation of normal means, accounting for uncertainty in estimated standard errors] Lu 2019
== ANOVA ==
* [https://cloud.r-project.org/doc/contrib/Faraway-PRA.pdf Practical Regression and Anova using R] by Julian J. Faraway, 2002
* [http://wiekvoet.blogspot.com/2016/01/a-simple-anova.html A simple ANOVA]
* [http://r-exercises.com/2016/11/29/repeated-measures-anova-in-r-exercises/ Repeated measures ANOVA in R Exercises]
* [http://singmann.org/mixed-models-for-anova-designs-with-one-observation-per-unit-of-observation-and-cell-of-the-design/ Mixed models for ANOVA designs with one observation per unit of observation and cell of the design]
* [http://singmann.org/anova-in-r-afex-may-be-the-solution-you-are-looking-for/ afex] package, [http://singmann.org/afex_plot/ afex_plot(): Publication-Ready Plots for Factorial Designs]
* [http://r-video-tutorial.blogspot.com/2017/07/experiment-designs-for-agriculture.html Experiment designs for Agriculture]
=== Common tests are linear models ===
https://lindeloev.github.io/tests-as-linear/
=== Post-hoc test ===
Determine which levels have significantly different means.
* http://jamesmarquezportfolio.com/one_way_anova_with_post_hocs_in_r.html
* [https://stats.idre.ucla.edu/r/faq/how-can-i-do-post-hoc-pairwise-comparisons-in-r/ pairwise.t.test()] for one-way ANOVA
* [https://www.r-bloggers.com/post-hoc-pairwise-comparisons-of-two-way-anova/ Post-hoc Pairwise Comparisons of Two-way ANOVA] using TukeyHSD().
* post-hoc tests: pairwise.t.test versus TukeyHSD test
=== TukeyHSD (Honestly Significant Difference), diagnostic checking ===
https://datascienceplus.com/one-way-anova-in-r/, [https://brownmath.com/stat/anova1.htm#HSD Tukey HSD for Post-Hoc Analysis] (detailed explanation including the type 1 error problem in multiple testings)
* TukeyHSD for the pairwise tests
** You can’t just perform a series of t tests, because that would greatly increase your likelihood of a Type I error.
** compute something analogous to a t score for each pair of means, but you don’t compare it to the Student’s t distribution. Instead, you use a new distribution called the '''[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Studentized_range_distribution studentized range]''' (from Wikipedia) or '''q distribution'''.
** Suppose that we take a sample of size ''n'' from each of ''k'' populations with the same normal distribution ''N''(''μ'',&nbsp;''σ'') and suppose that <math>\bar{y}</math><sub>min</sub> is the smallest of these sample means and <math>\bar{y}</math><sub>max</sub> is the largest of these sample means, and suppose ''S''<sup>2</sup> is the pooled sample variance from these samples. Then the following random variable has a Studentized range distribution: <math>q = \frac{\overline{y}_{\max} - \overline{y}_{\min}}{S/\sqrt{n}}</math>
** [http://www.sthda.com/english/wiki/one-way-anova-test-in-r#tukey-multiple-pairwise-comparisons One-Way ANOVA Test in R] from sthda.com. <syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
res.aov <- aov(weight ~ group, data = PlantGrowth)
summary(res.aov)
#              Df Sum Sq Mean Sq F value Pr(>F) 
#  group        2  3.766  1.8832  4.846 0.0159 *
#  Residuals  27 10.492  0.3886               
TukeyHSD(res.aov)
# Tukey multiple comparisons of means
# 95% family-wise confidence level
#
# Fit: aov(formula = weight ~ group, data = PlantGrowth)
#
# $group
#            diff        lwr      upr    p adj
# trt1-ctrl -0.371 -1.0622161 0.3202161 0.3908711
# trt2-ctrl  0.494 -0.1972161 1.1852161 0.1979960
# trt2-trt1  0.865  0.1737839 1.5562161 0.0120064
# Extra:
# Check your data
my_data <- PlantGrowth
levels(my_data$group)
set.seed(1234)
dplyr::sample_n(my_data, 10)
# compute the summary statistics by group
library(dplyr)
group_by(my_data, group) %>%
  summarise(
    count = n(),
    mean = mean(weight, na.rm = TRUE),
    sd = sd(weight, na.rm = TRUE)
  )
</syntaxhighlight>
** Or we can use Benjamini-Hochberg method for p-value adjustment in pairwise comparisons <syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
library(multcomp)
pairwise.t.test(my_data$weight, my_data$group,
                p.adjust.method = "BH")
#      ctrl  trt1
# trt1 0.194 -   
# trt2 0.132 0.013
#
# P value adjustment method: BH
</syntaxhighlight>
* Shapiro-Wilk test for normality <syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
# Extract the residuals
aov_residuals <- residuals(object = res.aov )
# Run Shapiro-Wilk test
shapiro.test(x = aov_residuals )
</syntaxhighlight>
* Bartlett test and Levene test for the homogeneity of variances across the groups
=== Repeated measure ===
* [https://neuropsychology.github.io/psycho.R//2018/05/01/repeated_measure_anovas.html How to do Repeated Measures ANOVAs in R]
* [https://onlinecourses.science.psu.edu/stat502/node/206 Cross-over Repeated Measure Designs]
* [https://www.rdatagen.net/post/when-the-research-question-doesn-t-fit-nicely-into-a-standard-study-design/ Cross-over study design with a major constraint]
=== Combining insignificant factor levels ===
[https://freakonometrics.hypotheses.org/55451 COMBINING AUTOMATICALLY FACTOR LEVELS IN R]
=== Omnibus tests ===
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omnibus_test
* [https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/59891/understanding-the-definition-of-omnibus-tests Understanding the definition of omnibus tests] Tests are refereed to as omnibus if after rejecting the null hypothesis you do not know where the differences assessed by the statistical test are. In the case of F tests they are omnibus when there is more than one df in the numerator (3 or more groups) it is omnibus.
== [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodness_of_fit Goodness of fit] ==
=== [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearson%27s_chi-squared_test Chi-square tests] ===
* [http://freakonometrics.hypotheses.org/20531 An application of chi-square tests]
=== Fitting distribution ===
[https://magesblog.com/post/2011-12-01-fitting-distributions-with-r/ Fitting distributions with R]
== Contingency Tables ==
=== [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odds_ratio Odds ratio and Risk ratio] ===
The ratio of the odds of an event occurring in one group to the odds of it occurring in another group
<pre>
        drawn  | not drawn |
-------------------------------------
white |  A      |  B      | Wh
-------------------------------------
black |  C      |  D      | Bk
</pre>
* Odds Ratio = (A / C) / (B / D) = (AD) / (BC)
* Risk Ratio = (A / Wh) / (C / Bk)
=== Hypergeometric, One-tailed Fisher exact test ===
* https://www.bioconductor.org/help/course-materials/2009/SeattleApr09/gsea/ (Are interesting features over-represented? or are selected genes more often in the ''GO category'' than expected by chance?)
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypergeometric_distribution. '' In a test for over-representation of successes in the sample, the hypergeometric p-value is calculated as the probability of randomly drawing '''k''' or more successes from the population in '''n''' total draws. In a test for under-representation, the p-value is the probability of randomly drawing '''k''' or fewer successes.''
* http://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/62235/one-tailed-fishers-exact-test-and-the-hypergeometric-distribution
* Two sided hypergeometric test
** http://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/155189/how-to-make-a-two-tailed-hypergeometric-test
** http://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/140107/p-value-in-a-two-tail-test-with-asymmetric-null-distribution
** http://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/19195/explaining-two-tailed-tests
* https://www.biostars.org/p/90662/ When computing the p-value (tail probability), consider to use 1 - Prob(observed -1) instead of 1 - Prob(observed) for discrete distribution.
* https://stat.ethz.ch/R-manual/R-devel/library/stats/html/Hypergeometric.html p(x) = choose(m, x) choose(n, k-x) / choose(m+n, k).
<pre>
        drawn  | not drawn |
-------------------------------------
white |  x      |          | m
-------------------------------------
black |  k-x    |          | n
-------------------------------------
      |  k      |          | m+n
</pre>
For example, k=100, m=100, m+n=1000,
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
> 1 - phyper(10, 100, 10^3-100, 100, log.p=F)
[1] 0.4160339
> a <- dhyper(0:10, 100, 10^3-100, 100)
> cumsum(rev(a))
  [1] 1.566158e-140 1.409558e-135 3.136408e-131 3.067025e-127 1.668004e-123 5.739613e-120 1.355765e-116
  [8] 2.325536e-113 3.018276e-110 3.058586e-107 2.480543e-104 1.642534e-101  9.027724e-99  4.175767e-96
[15]  1.644702e-93  5.572070e-91  1.638079e-88  4.210963e-86  9.530281e-84  1.910424e-81  3.410345e-79
[22]  5.447786e-77  7.821658e-75  1.013356e-72  1.189000e-70  1.267638e-68  1.231736e-66  1.093852e-64
[29]  8.900857e-63  6.652193e-61  4.576232e-59  2.903632e-57  1.702481e-55  9.240350e-54  4.650130e-52
[36]  2.173043e-50  9.442985e-49  3.820823e-47  1.441257e-45  5.074077e-44  1.669028e-42  5.134399e-41
[43]  1.478542e-39  3.989016e-38  1.009089e-36  2.395206e-35  5.338260e-34  1.117816e-32  2.200410e-31
[50]  4.074043e-30  7.098105e-29  1.164233e-27  1.798390e-26  2.617103e-25  3.589044e-24  4.639451e-23
[57]  5.654244e-22  6.497925e-21  7.042397e-20  7.198582e-19  6.940175e-18  6.310859e-17  5.412268e-16
[64]  4.377256e-15  3.338067e-14  2.399811e-13  1.626091e-12  1.038184e-11  6.243346e-11  3.535115e-10
[71]  1.883810e-09  9.442711e-09  4.449741e-08  1.970041e-07  8.188671e-07  3.193112e-06  1.167109e-05
[78]  3.994913e-05  1.279299e-04  3.828641e-04  1.069633e-03  2.786293e-03  6.759071e-03  1.525017e-02
[85]  3.196401e-02  6.216690e-02  1.120899e-01  1.872547e-01  2.898395e-01  4.160339e-01  5.550192e-01
[92]  6.909666e-01  8.079129e-01  8.953150e-01  9.511926e-01  9.811343e-01  9.942110e-01  9.986807e-01
[99]  9.998018e-01  9.999853e-01  1.000000e+00
# Density plot
plot(0:100, dhyper(0:100, 100, 10^3-100, 100), type='h')
</syntaxhighlight>
[[File:Dhyper.svg|200px]]
Moreover,
<pre>
  1 - phyper(q=10, m, n, k)
= 1 - sum_{x=0}^{x=10} phyper(x, m, n, k)
= 1 - sum(a[1:11]) # R's index starts from 1.
</pre>
Another example is the data from [https://david.ncifcrf.gov/helps/functional_annotation.html#fisher the functional annotation tool] in DAVID.
<pre>
              | gene list | not gene list |
-------------------------------------------------------
pathway        |  3  (q)  |              | 40 (m)
-------------------------------------------------------
not in pathway |  297      |              | 29960 (n)
-------------------------------------------------------
              |  300 (k)  |              | 30000
</pre>
The one-tailed p-value from the hypergeometric test is calculated as 1 - phyper(3-1, 40, 29960, 300) = 0.0074.
=== [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisher%27s_exact_test Fisher's exact test] ===
Following the above example from the DAVID website, the following R command calculates the Fisher exact test for independence in 2x2 contingency tables.
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
> fisher.test(matrix(c(3, 40, 297, 29960), nr=2)) #  alternative = "two.sided" by default
        Fisher's Exact Test for Count Data
data:  matrix(c(3, 40, 297, 29960), nr = 2)
p-value = 0.008853
alternative hypothesis: true odds ratio is not equal to 1
95 percent confidence interval:
  1.488738 23.966741
sample estimates:
odds ratio
  7.564602
> fisher.test(matrix(c(3, 40, 297, 29960), nr=2), alternative="greater")
        Fisher's Exact Test for Count Data
data:  matrix(c(3, 40, 297, 29960), nr = 2)
p-value = 0.008853
alternative hypothesis: true odds ratio is greater than 1
95 percent confidence interval:
1.973  Inf
sample estimates:
odds ratio
  7.564602
> fisher.test(matrix(c(3, 40, 297, 29960), nr=2), alternative="less")
        Fisher's Exact Test for Count Data
data:  matrix(c(3, 40, 297, 29960), nr = 2)
p-value = 0.9991
alternative hypothesis: true odds ratio is less than 1
95 percent confidence interval:
  0.00000 20.90259
sample estimates:
odds ratio
  7.564602
</syntaxhighlight>
From the documentation of [https://stat.ethz.ch/R-manual/R-devel/library/stats/html/fisher.test.html fisher.test]
<pre>
Usage:
    fisher.test(x, y = NULL, workspace = 200000, hybrid = FALSE,
                control = list(), or = 1, alternative = "two.sided",
                conf.int = TRUE, conf.level = 0.95,
                simulate.p.value = FALSE, B = 2000)
</pre>
* For 2 by 2 cases, p-values are obtained directly using the (central or non-central) hypergeometric distribution.
* For 2 by 2 tables, the null of conditional independence is equivalent to the hypothesis that the odds ratio equals one.
* The alternative for a one-sided test is based on the odds ratio, so ‘alternative = "greater"’ is a test of the odds ratio being bigger than ‘or’.
* Two-sided tests are based on the probabilities of the tables, and take as ‘more extreme’ all tables with probabilities less than or equal to that of the observed table, the p-value being the sum of such probabilities.
=== Chi-square independence test ===
[https://www.rdatagen.net/post/a-little-intuition-and-simulation-behind-the-chi-square-test-of-independence-part-2/ Exploring the underlying theory of the chi-square test through simulation - part 2]
=== [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_set_enrichment_analysis GSEA] ===
Determines whether an a priori defined set of genes shows statistically significant, concordant differences between two biological states
* https://www.bioconductor.org/help/course-materials/2015/SeattleApr2015/E_GeneSetEnrichment.html
* http://software.broadinstitute.org/gsea/index.jsp
* [http://www.biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2017/09/08/186288.full.pdf Statistical power of gene-set enrichment analysis is a function of gene set correlation structure] by SWANSON 2017
* [https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/674267v1 Towards a gold standard for benchmarking gene set enrichment analysis], [http://bioconductor.org/packages/release/bioc/html/GSEABenchmarkeR.html GSEABenchmarkeR] package
Two categories of GSEA procedures:
* Competitive:  compare genes in the test set relative to all other genes.
* Self-contained: whether the gene-set is more DE than one were to expect under the null of no association between two phenotype conditions (without reference to other genes in the genome). For example the method by [http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~psgendb/birchhomedir/doc/MeV/manual/gsea.html Jiang & Gentleman Bioinformatics 2007]
== Confidence vs Credibility Intervals ==
http://freakonometrics.hypotheses.org/18117
== Power analysis/Sample Size determination ==
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sample_size_determination Sample size determination] from Wikipedia
* Power and Sample Size Determination http://www.stat.wisc.edu/~st571-1/10-power-2.pdf#page=12
* http://biostat.mc.vanderbilt.edu/wiki/pub/Main/AnesShortCourse/HypothesisTestingPart1.pdf#page=40
* [http://r-video-tutorial.blogspot.com/2017/07/power-analysis-and-sample-size.html Power analysis and sample size calculation for Agriculture] ('''pwr, lmSupport, simr''' packages are used)
* [http://daniellakens.blogspot.com/2016/11/why-within-subject-designs-require-less.html Why Within-Subject Designs Require Fewer Participants than Between-Subject Designs]
=== Power analysis for default Bayesian t-tests ===
http://daniellakens.blogspot.com/2016/01/power-analysis-for-default-bayesian-t.html
=== Using simulation for power analysis: an example based on a stepped wedge study design ===
https://www.rdatagen.net/post/using-simulation-for-power-analysis-an-example/
=== Power analysis and sample size calculation for Agriculture ===
http://r-video-tutorial.blogspot.com/2017/07/power-analysis-and-sample-size.html
=== Power calculation for proportions (shiny app) ===
https://juliasilge.shinyapps.io/power-app/
=== Derive the formula/manual calculation ===
* [http://powerandsamplesize.com/Knowledge/derive-z-test-1-sample-1-sided One-sample 1-sided test], [http://www.cyclismo.org/tutorial/R/power.html#calculating-the-power-using-a-normal-distribution One sample 2-sided test]
* [http://gchang.people.ysu.edu/class/s5817/L/L5817_1_2_PowerSampleSize_n.pdf#page=6 Two-sample 2-sided T test] (<math>n</math> is the sample size in each group)
:<math> 
\begin{align}
Power & = P_{\mu_1-\mu_2 = \Delta}(\frac{\bar{X}_1 - \bar{X}_2}{\sqrt{\sigma^2/n + \sigma^2/n}} > Z_{\alpha /2}) +
    P_{\mu_1-\mu_2 = \Delta}(\frac{\bar{X}_1 - \bar{X}_2}{\sqrt{\sigma^2/n + \sigma^2/n}} < -Z_{\alpha /2}) \\
    &  \approx P_{\mu_1-\mu_2 = \Delta}(\frac{\bar{X}_1 - \bar{X}_2}{\sqrt{\sigma^2/n + \sigma^2/n}} > Z_{\alpha /2}) \\
    & =  P_{\mu_1-\mu_2 = \Delta}(\frac{\bar{X}_1 - \bar{X}_2 - \Delta}{\sqrt{2 * \sigma^2/n}} > Z_{\alpha /2} - \frac{\Delta}{\sqrt{2 * \sigma^2/n}}) \\
    & = \Phi(-(Z_{\alpha /2} - \frac{\Delta}{\sqrt{2 * \sigma^2/n}})) \\
    & = 1 - \beta =\Phi(Z_\beta)
\end{align}
</math>
Therefore
:<math>
\begin{align}
Z_{\beta} &= - Z_{\alpha/2} + \frac{\Delta}{\sqrt{2 * \sigma^2/n}} \\
Z_{\beta} + Z_{\alpha/2} & =  \frac{\Delta}{\sqrt{2 * \sigma^2/n}}  \\
2 * (Z_{\beta} + Z_{\alpha/2})^2 * \sigma^2/\Delta^2 & =  n \\
n & = 2 * (Z_{\beta} + Z_{\alpha/2})^2 * \sigma^2/\Delta^2
\end{align}
</math>
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
# alpha = .05, delta = 200, n = 79.5, sigma=450
1 - pnorm(1.96 - 200*sqrt(79.5)/(sqrt(2)*450)) + pnorm(-1.96 - 200*sqrt(79.5)/(sqrt(2)*450))
# [1] 0.8
pnorm(-1.96 - 200*sqrt(79.5)/(sqrt(2)*450))
# [1] 9.58e-07
1 - pnorm(1.96 - 200*sqrt(79.5)/(sqrt(2)*450))
# [1] 0.8
</syntaxhighlight>
=== [http://geraldbelton.com/calculating-required-sample-size-in-r-and-sas/#sthash.jT6fZ29h.dpbs Calculating required sample size in R and SAS] ===
'''pwr''' package is used. For two-sided test, the formula for sample size is
:<math> n_{\mbox{each group}} = \frac{2 * (Z_{\alpha/2} + Z_\beta)^2 * \sigma^2}{\Delta^2} = \frac{2 * (Z_{\alpha/2} + Z_\beta)^2}{d^2} </math>
where <math>Z_\alpha</math> is value of the Normal distribution which cuts off an upper tail probability of <math>\alpha</math>, <math>\Delta</math> is the difference sought, <math>\sigma</math> is the presumed standard deviation of the outcome, <math>\alpha</math> is the type 1 error, <math>\beta</math> is the type II error and (Cohen's) d is the '''effect size''' - difference between the means divided by the pooled standard deviation. 
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
# An example from http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~gelman/stuff_for_blog/c13.pdf#page=3
# Method 1.
require(pwr)
pwr.t.test(d=200/450, power=.8, sig.level=.05,
          type="two.sample", alternative="two.sided")
#
#    Two-sample t test power calculation
#
#              n = 80.4
#              d = 0.444
#      sig.level = 0.05
#          power = 0.8
#    alternative = two.sided
#
# NOTE: n is number in *each* group
# Method 2.
2*(qnorm(.975) + qnorm(.8))^2*450^2/(200^2)
# [1] 79.5
2*(1.96 + .84)^2*450^2 / (200^2)
# [1] 79.4
</syntaxhighlight>
And stats::power.t.test() function.
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
power.t.test(n = 79.5, delta = 200, sd = 450, sig.level = .05,
            type ="two.sample", alternative = "two.sided")
#
#    Two-sample t test power calculation
#
#              n = 79.5
#          delta = 200
#            sd = 450
#      sig.level = 0.05
#          power = 0.795
#    alternative = two.sided
#
# NOTE: n is number in *each* group
</syntaxhighlight>
=== R package related to power analysis ===
[https://cran.r-project.org/web/views/ExperimentalDesign.html CRAN Task View: Design of Experiments]
* [https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/powerAnalysis/index.html powerAnalysis] w/o vignette
* [https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/powerbydesign/index.html powerbydesign] w/o vignette
* [https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/easypower/index.html easypower] w/ vignette
* [https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/pwr/index.html pwr] w/ vignette, https://www.statmethods.net/stats/power.html. The reference is Cohen's book.
* [https://github.com/rpsychologist/powerlmm powerlmm] Power Analysis for Longitudinal Multilevel/Linear Mixed-Effects Models.
* [https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/ssize.fdr/index.html ssize.fdr] w/o vignette
* [https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/samplesize/index.html samplesize] w/o vignette
* [https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/ssizeRNA/index.html ssizeRNA] w/ vignette
* power.t.test(), power.anova.test(), power.prop.test() from [https://stat.ethz.ch/R-manual/R-devel/library/stats/html/00Index.html stats] package
=== Russ Lenth Java applets ===
https://homepage.divms.uiowa.edu/~rlenth/Power/index.html
=== Bootstrap method ===
[https://academic.oup.com/biostatistics/advance-article/doi/10.1093/biostatistics/kxy054/5106666 The upstrap] Crainiceanu & Crainiceanu, Biostatistics 2018
=== Multiple Testing Case ===
[https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1198/016214504000001646 Optimal Sample Size for Multiple Testing The Case of Gene Expression Microarrays]
== Common covariance/correlation structures ==
See [https://onlinecourses.science.psu.edu/stat502/node/228 psu.edu]. Assume covariance <math>\Sigma = (\sigma_{ij})_{p\times p} </math>
* Diagonal structure: <math>\sigma_{ij} = 0</math> if <math>i \neq j</math>.
* Compound symmetry: <math>\sigma_{ij} = \rho</math> if <math>i \neq j</math>.
* First-order autoregressive AR(1) structure: <math>\sigma_{ij} = \rho^{|i - j|}</math>. <syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
rho <- .8
p <- 5
blockMat <- rho ^ abs(matrix(1:p, p, p, byrow=T) - matrix(1:p, p, p))
</syntaxhighlight>
* Banded matrix: <math>\sigma_{ii}=1, \sigma_{i,i+1}=\sigma_{i+1,i} \neq 0, \sigma_{i,i+2}=\sigma_{i+2,i} \neq 0</math> and <math>\sigma_{ij}=0</math> for <math>|i-j| \ge 3</math>.
* Spatial Power
* Unstructured Covariance
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toeplitz_matrix Toeplitz structure]
To create blocks of correlation matrix, use the "%x%" operator. See [https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/base/versions/3.4.3/topics/kronecker kronecker()].
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
covMat <- diag(n.blocks) %x% blockMat
</syntaxhighlight>
== Counter/Special Examples ==
=== Correlated does not imply independence ===
Suppose X is a normally-distributed random variable with zero mean.  Let Y = X^2.  Clearly X and Y are not independent: if you know X, you also know Y.  And if you know Y, you know the absolute value of X.
The covariance of X and Y is
<pre>
  Cov(X,Y) = E(XY) - E(X)E(Y) = E(X^3) - 0*E(Y) = E(X^3)
          = 0,
</pre>
because the distribution of X is symmetric around zero.  Thus the correlation r(X,Y) = Cov(X,Y)/Sqrt[Var(X)Var(Y)] = 0, and we have a situation where the variables are not independent, yet
have (linear) correlation r(X,Y) = 0.
This example shows how a linear correlation coefficient does not encapsulate anything about the quadratic dependence of Y upon X.
=== Spearman vs Pearson correlation ===
Pearson benchmarks linear relationship, Spearman benchmarks monotonic relationship. https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/8071/how-to-choose-between-pearson-and-spearman-correlation
<pre>
x=(1:100); 
y=exp(x);                       
cor(x,y, method='spearman') # 1
cor(x,y, method='pearson')  # .25
</pre>
=== Spearman vs Wilcoxon ===
By [http://www.talkstats.com/threads/wilcoxon-signed-rank-test-or-spearmans-rho.42395/ this post]
* Wilcoxon used to compare categorical versus non-normal continuous variable
* Spearman's rho used to compare two continuous (including '''ordinal''') variables that one or both aren't normally distributed
=== Spearman vs [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kendall_rank_correlation_coefficient Kendall correlation] ===
* Kendall's tau coefficient (after the Greek letter τ), is a statistic used to measure the '''ordinal''' association between two measured quantities.
* [https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/3943/kendall-tau-or-spearmans-rho Kendall Tau or Spearman's rho?]
=== [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anscombe%27s_quartet Anscombe quartet] ===
Four datasets have almost same properties: same mean in X, same mean in Y, same variance in X, (almost) same variance in Y, same correlation in X and Y, same linear regression.
[[File:Anscombe quartet 3.svg|150px]]
=== The real meaning of spurious correlations ===
https://nsaunders.wordpress.com/2017/02/03/the-real-meaning-of-spurious-correlations/
<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>
library(ggplot2)
set.seed(123)
spurious_data <- data.frame(x = rnorm(500, 10, 1),
                            y = rnorm(500, 10, 1),
                            z = rnorm(500, 30, 3))
cor(spurious_data$x, spurious_data$y)
# [1] -0.05943856
spurious_data %>% ggplot(aes(x, y)) + geom_point(alpha = 0.3) +
theme_bw() + labs(title = "Plot of y versus x for 500 observations with N(10, 1)")
cor(spurious_data$x / spurious_data$z, spurious_data$y / spurious_data$z)
# [1] 0.4517972
spurious_data %>% ggplot(aes(x/z, y/z)) + geom_point(aes(color = z), alpha = 0.5) +
theme_bw() + geom_smooth(method = "lm") +
scale_color_gradientn(colours = c("red", "white", "blue")) +
labs(title = "Plot of y/z versus x/z for 500 observations with x,y N(10, 1); z N(30, 3)")
spurious_data$z <- rnorm(500, 30, 6)
cor(spurious_data$x / spurious_data$z, spurious_data$y / spurious_data$z)
# [1] 0.8424597
spurious_data %>% ggplot(aes(x/z, y/z)) + geom_point(aes(color = z), alpha = 0.5) +
theme_bw() + geom_smooth(method = "lm") +
scale_color_gradientn(colours = c("red", "white", "blue")) +
labs(title = "Plot of y/z versus x/z for 500 observations with x,y N(10, 1); z N(30, 6)")
</syntaxhighlight>
== Time series ==
* [http://ellisp.github.io/blog/2016/12/07/arima-prediction-intervals Why time series forecasts prediction intervals aren't as good as we'd hope]
=== Structural change ===
[https://datascienceplus.com/structural-changes-in-global-warming/ Structural Changes in Global Warming]
== Dictionary ==
* '''Prognosis''' is the probability that an event or diagnosis will result in a particular outcome.
** For example, on the paper [http://clincancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/18/21/6065.figures-only Developing and Validating Continuous Genomic Signatures in Randomized Clinical Trials for Predictive Medicine] by Matsui 2012, the prognostic score .1 (0.9) represents a '''good (poor)''' prognosis.
** Prostate cancer has a much higher one-year overall survival rate than pancreatic cancer, and thus has a better prognosis. See [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survival_rate Survival rate] in wikipedia.
== Data ==
=== Eleven quick tips for finding research data ===
http://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006038
== Books ==
* [https://leanpub.com/biostatmethods Methods in Biostatistics with R] ($)
* [http://web.stanford.edu/class/bios221/book/ Modern Statistics for Modern Biology] (free)
* Principles of Applied Statistics, by David Cox & Christl Donnelly
* [https://www.amazon.com/Freedman-Robert-Pisani-Statistics-Hardcover/dp/B004QNRMDK/ Statistics] by David Freedman,Robert Pisani, Roger Purves
* [https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/topic/browse/000113 Wiley Online Library -> Statistics] (Access by NIH Library)
* [https://web.stanford.edu/~hastie/CASI/ Computer Age Statistical Inference: Algorithms, Evidence and Data Science] by Efron and Hastie 2016
== Following ==
* [http://jtleek.com/ Jeff Leek], https://twitter.com/jtleek
* Revolutions, http://blog.revolutionanalytics.com/
* RStudio Blog, https://blog.rstudio.com/
* Sean Davis, https://twitter.com/seandavis12, https://github.com/seandavi
* [http://stephenturner.us/post/ Stephen Turner], https://twitter.com/genetics_blog

Revision as of 20:53, 23 June 2019

Statisticians

Statistics for biologists

http://www.nature.com/collections/qghhqm

Transform sample values to their percentiles

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/21219447/calculating-percentile-of-dataset-column

set.seed(1234)
x <- rnorm(10)
x
# [1] -1.2070657  0.2774292  1.0844412 -2.3456977  0.4291247  0.5060559
# [7] -0.5747400 -0.5466319 -0.5644520 -0.8900378
ecdf(x)(x)
# [1] 0.2 0.7 1.0 0.1 0.8 0.9 0.4 0.6 0.5 0.3

rank(x)
# [1]  2  7 10  1  8  9  4  6  5  3

Box(Box and whisker) plot in R

See

An example for a graphical explanation.

> x=c(0,4,15, 1, 6, 3, 20, 5, 8, 1, 3)
> summary(x)
   Min. 1st Qu.  Median    Mean 3rd Qu.    Max. 
      0       2       4       6       7      20 
> sort(x)
 [1]  0  1  1  3  3  4  5  6  8 15 20
> boxplot(x, col = 'grey')

# https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quartile#Example_1
> summary(c(6, 7, 15, 36, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 47, 49))
   Min. 1st Qu.  Median    Mean 3rd Qu.    Max. 
   6.00   25.50   40.00   33.18   42.50   49.00

Boxplot.svg

  • The lower and upper edges of box is determined by the first and 3rd quartiles (2 and 7 in the above example).
    • 2 = median(c(0, 1, 1, 3, 3, 4)) = (1+3)/2
    • 7 = median(c(4, 5, 6, 8, 15, 20)) = (6+8)/2
    • IQR = 7 - 2 = 5
  • The thick dark horizon line is the median (4 in the example).
  • Outliers are defined by (the empty circles in the plot)
    • Observations larger than 3rd quartile + 1.5 * IQR (7+1.5*5=14.5) and
    • smaller than 1st quartile - 1.5 * IQR (2-1.5*5=-5.5).
    • Note that the cutoffs are not shown in the Box plot.
  • Whisker (defined using the cutoffs used to define outliers)
    • Upper whisker is defined by the largest "data" below 3rd quartile + 1.5 * IQR (8 in this example), and
    • Lower whisker is defined by the smallest "data" greater than 1st quartile - 1.5 * IQR (0 in this example).
    • See another example below where we can see the whiskers fall on observations.

Note the wikipedia lists several possible definitions of a whisker. R uses the 2nd method (Tukey boxplot) to define whiskers.

Create boxplots from a list object

Normally we use a vector to create a single boxplot or a formula on a data to create boxplots.

But we can also use split() to create a list and then make boxplots.

Dot-box plot

Boxdot.svg

Other boxplots

Lotsboxplot.png

stem and leaf plot

stem(). See R Tutorial.

Note that stem plot is useful when there are outliers.

> stem(x)

  The decimal point is 10 digit(s) to the right of the |

   0 | 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000+419
   1 |
   2 |
   3 |
   4 |
   5 |
   6 |
   7 |
   8 |
   9 |
  10 |
  11 |
  12 | 9

> max(x)
[1] 129243100275
> max(x)/1e10
[1] 12.92431

> stem(y)

  The decimal point is at the |

  0 | 014478
  1 | 0
  2 | 1
  3 | 9
  4 | 8

> y
 [1] 3.8667356428 0.0001762708 0.7993462430 0.4181079732 0.9541728562
 [6] 4.7791262101 0.6899313108 2.1381289177 0.0541736818 0.3868776083

> set.seed(1234)
> z <- rnorm(10)*10
> z
 [1] -12.070657   2.774292  10.844412 -23.456977   4.291247   5.060559
 [7]  -5.747400  -5.466319  -5.644520  -8.900378
> stem(z)

  The decimal point is 1 digit(s) to the right of the |

  -2 | 3
  -1 | 2
  -0 | 9665
   0 | 345
   1 | 1

Box-Cox transformation

the Holy Trinity (LRT, Wald, Score tests)

Don't invert that matrix

Different matrix decompositions/factorizations

set.seed(1234)
x <- matrix(rnorm(10*2), nr= 10)
cmat <- cov(x); cmat
# [,1]       [,2]
# [1,]  0.9915928 -0.1862983
# [2,] -0.1862983  1.1392095

# cholesky decom
d1 <- chol(cmat)
t(d1) %*% d1  # equal to cmat
d1  # upper triangle
# [,1]       [,2]
# [1,] 0.9957875 -0.1870864
# [2,] 0.0000000  1.0508131

# svd
d2 <- svd(cmat)
d2$u %*% diag(d2$d) %*% t(d2$v) # equal to cmat
d2$u %*% diag(sqrt(d2$d))
# [,1]      [,2]
# [1,] -0.6322816 0.7692937
# [2,]  0.9305953 0.5226872

Linear Regression

Regression Models for Data Science in R by Brian Caffo

Comic https://xkcd.com/1725/

Different models (in R)

http://www.quantide.com/raccoon-ch-1-introduction-to-linear-models-with-r/

dummy.coef.lm() in R

Extracts coefficients in terms of the original levels of the coefficients rather than the coded variables.

Contrasts in linear regression

  • Page 147 of Modern Applied Statistics with S (4th ed)
  • https://biologyforfun.wordpress.com/2015/01/13/using-and-interpreting-different-contrasts-in-linear-models-in-r/ This explains the meanings of 'treatment', 'helmert' and 'sum' contrasts.
  • A (sort of) Complete Guide to Contrasts in R by Rose Maier
    mat
    
    ##      constant NLvMH  NvL  MvH
    ## [1,]        1  -0.5  0.5  0.0
    ## [2,]        1  -0.5 -0.5  0.0
    ## [3,]        1   0.5  0.0  0.5
    ## [4,]        1   0.5  0.0 -0.5
    mat <- mat[ , -1]
    
    model7 <- lm(y ~ dose, data=data, contrasts=list(dose=mat) )
    summary(model7)
    
    ## Coefficients:
    ##             Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)    
    ## (Intercept)  118.578      1.076 110.187  < 2e-16 ***
    ## doseNLvMH      3.179      2.152   1.477  0.14215    
    ## doseNvL       -8.723      3.044  -2.866  0.00489 ** 
    ## doseMvH       13.232      3.044   4.347 2.84e-05 ***
    
    # double check your contrasts
    attributes(model7$qr$qr)$contrasts
    ## $dose
    ##      NLvMH  NvL  MvH
    ## None  -0.5  0.5  0.0
    ## Low   -0.5 -0.5  0.0
    ## Med    0.5  0.0  0.5
    ## High   0.5  0.0 -0.5
    
    library(dplyr)
    dose.means <- summarize(group_by(data, dose), y.mean=mean(y))
    dose.means
    ## Source: local data frame [4 x 2]
    ## 
    ##   dose   y.mean
    ## 1 None 112.6267
    ## 2  Low 121.3500
    ## 3  Med 126.7839
    ## 4 High 113.5517
    
    # The coefficient estimate for the first contrast (3.18) equals the average of 
    # the last two groups (126.78 + 113.55 /2 = 120.17) minus the average of 
    # the first two groups (112.63 + 121.35 /2 = 116.99).

Multicollinearity

> op <- options(contrasts = c("contr.helmert", "contr.poly"))
> npk.aov <- aov(yield ~ block + N*P*K, npk)
> alias(npk.aov)
Model :
yield ~ block + N * P * K

Complete :
         (Intercept) block1 block2 block3 block4 block5 N1    P1    K1    N1:P1 N1:K1 P1:K1
N1:P1:K1     0           1    1/3    1/6  -3/10   -1/5      0     0     0     0     0     0

> options(op)

Exposure

https://en.mimi.hu/mathematics/exposure_variable.html

Independent variable = predictor = explanatory = exposure variable

Confounders, confounding

Confidence interval vs prediction interval

Confidence intervals tell you about how well you have determined the mean E(Y). Prediction intervals tell you where you can expect to see the next data point sampled. That is, CI is computed using Var(E(Y|X)) and PI is computed using Var(E(Y|X) + e).

Heteroskedasticity

Dealing with heteroskedasticity; regression with robust standard errors using R

Linear regression with Map Reduce

https://freakonometrics.hypotheses.org/53269

Non- and semi-parametric regression

Splines

k-Nearest neighbor regression

  • k-NN regression in practice: boundary problem, discontinuities problem.
  • Weighted k-NN regression: want weight to be small when distance is large. Common choices - weight = kernel(xi, x)

Kernel regression

  • Instead of weighting NN, weight ALL points. Nadaraya-Watson kernel weighted average:

[math]\displaystyle{ \hat{y}_q = \sum c_{qi} y_i/\sum c_{qi} = \frac{\sum \text{Kernel}_\lambda(\text{distance}(x_i, x_q))*y_i}{\sum \text{Kernel}_\lambda(\text{distance}(x_i, x_q))} }[/math].

  • Choice of bandwidth [math]\displaystyle{ \lambda }[/math] for bias, variance trade-off. Small [math]\displaystyle{ \lambda }[/math] is over-fitting. Large [math]\displaystyle{ \lambda }[/math] can get an over-smoothed fit. Cross-validation.
  • Kernel regression leads to locally constant fit.
  • Issues with high dimensions, data scarcity and computational complexity.

Principal component analysis

R source code

> stats:::prcomp.default
function (x, retx = TRUE, center = TRUE, scale. = FALSE, tol = NULL, 
    ...) 
{
    x <- as.matrix(x)
    x <- scale(x, center = center, scale = scale.)
    cen <- attr(x, "scaled:center")
    sc <- attr(x, "scaled:scale")
    if (any(sc == 0)) 
        stop("cannot rescale a constant/zero column to unit variance")
    s <- svd(x, nu = 0)
    s$d <- s$d/sqrt(max(1, nrow(x) - 1))
    if (!is.null(tol)) {
        rank <- sum(s$d > (s$d[1L] * tol))
        if (rank < ncol(x)) {
            s$v <- s$v[, 1L:rank, drop = FALSE]
            s$d <- s$d[1L:rank]
        }
    }
    dimnames(s$v) <- list(colnames(x), paste0("PC", seq_len(ncol(s$v))))
    r <- list(sdev = s$d, rotation = s$v, center = if (is.null(cen)) FALSE else cen, 
        scale = if (is.null(sc)) FALSE else sc)
    if (retx) 
        r$x <- x %*% s$v
    class(r) <- "prcomp"
    r
}
<bytecode: 0x000000003296c7d8>
<environment: namespace:stats>

R example

http://genomicsclass.github.io/book/pages/pca_svd.html

pc <- prcomp(x)
group <- as.numeric(tab$Tissue)
plot(pc$x[, 1], pc$x[, 2], col = group, main = "PCA", xlab = "PC1", ylab = "PC2")

The meaning of colors can be found by palette().

  1. black
  2. red
  3. green3
  4. blue
  5. cyan
  6. magenta
  7. yellow
  8. gray

PCA and SVD

Using the SVD to perform PCA makes much better sense numerically than forming the covariance matrix to begin with, since the formation of [math]\displaystyle{ X X^T }[/math] can cause loss of precision.

http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/3869/what-is-the-intuitive-relationship-between-svd-and-pca

AIC/BIC in estimating the number of components

Consistency of AIC and BIC in estimating the number of significant components in high-dimensional principal component analysis

Related to Factor Analysis

In short,

  1. In Principal Components Analysis, the components are calculated as linear combinations of the original variables. In Factor Analysis, the original variables are defined as linear combinations of the factors.
  2. In Principal Components Analysis, the goal is to explain as much of the total variance in the variables as possible. The goal in Factor Analysis is to explain the covariances or correlations between the variables.
  3. Use Principal Components Analysis to reduce the data into a smaller number of components. Use Factor Analysis to understand what constructs underlie the data.

Calculated by Hand

http://strata.uga.edu/software/pdf/pcaTutorial.pdf

Do not scale your matrix

https://privefl.github.io/blog/(Linear-Algebra)-Do-not-scale-your-matrix/

Visualization

What does it do if we choose center=FALSE in prcomp()?

In USArrests data, use center=FALSE gives a better scatter plot of the first 2 PCA components.

x1 = prcomp(USArrests) 
x2 = prcomp(USArrests, center=F)
plot(x1$x[,1], x1$x[,2])  # looks random
windows(); plot(x2$x[,1], x2$x[,2]) # looks good in some sense

Relation to Multidimensional scaling/MDS

With no missing data, classical MDS (Euclidean distance metric) is the same as PCA.

Comparisons are here.

Differences are asked/answered on stackexchange.com. The post also answered the question when these two are the same.

isoMDS (Non-metric)

cmdscale (Metric)

Matrix factorization methods

http://joelcadwell.blogspot.com/2015/08/matrix-factorization-comes-in-many.html Review of principal component analysis (PCA), K-means clustering, nonnegative matrix factorization (NMF) and archetypal analysis (AA).

Number of components

Obtaining the number of components from cross validation of principal components regression

Partial Least Squares (PLS)

[math]\displaystyle{ X = T P^\mathrm{T} + E }[/math]
[math]\displaystyle{ Y = U Q^\mathrm{T} + F }[/math]

where X is an [math]\displaystyle{ n \times m }[/math] matrix of predictors, Y is an [math]\displaystyle{ n \times p }[/math] matrix of responses; T and U are [math]\displaystyle{ n \times l }[/math] matrices that are, respectively, projections of X (the X score, component or factor matrix) and projections of Y (the Y scores); P and Q are, respectively, [math]\displaystyle{ m \times l }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ p \times l }[/math] orthogonal loading matrices; and matrices E and F are the error terms, assumed to be independent and identically distributed random normal variables. The decompositions of X and Y are made so as to maximise the covariance between T and U (projection matrices).

PLS, PCR (principal components regression) and ridge regression tend to behave similarly. Ridge regression may be preferred because it shrinks smoothly, rather than in discrete steps.

High dimension

Partial least squares prediction in high-dimensional regression Cook and Forzani, 2019

Independent component analysis

ICA is another dimensionality reduction method.

ICA vs PCA

ICS vs FA

Correspondence analysis

https://francoishusson.wordpress.com/2017/07/18/multiple-correspondence-analysis-with-factominer/ and the book Exploratory Multivariate Analysis by Example Using R

t-SNE

t-Distributed Stochastic Neighbor Embedding (t-SNE) is a technique for dimensionality reduction that is particularly well suited for the visualization of high-dimensional datasets.

Visualize the random effects

http://www.quantumforest.com/2012/11/more-sense-of-random-effects/

Calibration

  • How to determine calibration accuracy/uncertainty of a linear regression?
  • Linear Regression and Calibration Curves
  • Regression and calibration Shaun Burke
  • calibrate package
  • The index of prediction accuracy: an intuitive measure useful for evaluating risk prediction models by Kattan and Gerds 2018. The following code demonstrates Figure 2.
    # Odds ratio =1 and calibrated model
    set.seed(666)
    x = rnorm(1000)           
    z1 = 1 + 0*x        
    pr1 = 1/(1+exp(-z1))
    y1 = rbinom(1000,1,pr1)  
    mean(y1) # .724, marginal prevalence of the outcome
    dat1 <- data.frame(x=x, y=y1)
    newdat1 <- data.frame(x=rnorm(1000), y=rbinom(1000, 1, pr1))
    
    # Odds ratio =1 and severely miscalibrated model
    set.seed(666)
    x = rnorm(1000)           
    z2 =  -2 + 0*x        
    pr2 = 1/(1+exp(-z2))  
    y2 = rbinom(1000,1,pr2)  
    mean(y2) # .12
    dat2 <- data.frame(x=x, y=y2)
    newdat2 <- data.frame(x=rnorm(1000), y=rbinom(1000, 1, pr2))
    
    library(riskRegression)
    lrfit1 <- glm(y ~ x, data = dat1, family = 'binomial')
    IPA(lrfit1, newdata = newdat1)
    #     Variable     Brier           IPA     IPA.gain
    # 1 Null model 0.1984710  0.000000e+00 -0.003160010
    # 2 Full model 0.1990982 -3.160010e-03  0.000000000
    # 3          x 0.1984800 -4.534668e-05 -0.003114664
    1 - 0.1990982/0.1984710
    # [1] -0.003160159
    
    lrfit2 <- glm(y ~ x, family = 'binomial')
    IPA(lrfit2, newdata = newdat1)
    #     Variable     Brier       IPA     IPA.gain
    # 1 Null model 0.1984710  0.000000 -1.859333763
    # 2 Full model 0.5674948 -1.859334  0.000000000
    # 3          x 0.5669200 -1.856437 -0.002896299
    1 - 0.5674948/0.1984710
    # [1] -1.859334
    From the simulated data, we see IPA = -3.16e-3 for a calibrated model and IPA = -1.86 for a severely miscalibrated model.

ROC curve and Brier score

  • Binary case:
    • Y = true positive rate = sensitivity,
    • X = false positive rate = 1-specificity
  • Area under the curve AUC from the wikipedia: the probability that a classifier will rank a randomly chosen positive instance higher than a randomly chosen negative one (assuming 'positive' ranks higher than 'negative').
[math]\displaystyle{ A = \int_{\infty}^{-\infty} \mbox{TPR}(T) \mbox{FPR}'(T) \, dT = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} I(T'\gt T)f_1(T') f_0(T) \, dT' \, dT = P(X_1 \gt X_0) }[/math]

where [math]\displaystyle{ X_1 }[/math] is the score for a positive instance and [math]\displaystyle{ X_0 }[/math] is the score for a negative instance, and [math]\displaystyle{ f_0 }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ f_1 }[/math] are probability densities as defined in previous section.

  • Interpretation of the AUC. A small toy example (n=12=4+8) was used to calculate the exact probability [math]\displaystyle{ P(X_1 \gt X_0) }[/math] (4*8=32 all combinations).
    • It is a discrimination measure which tells us how well we can classify patients in two groups: those with and those without the outcome of interest.
    • Since the measure is based on ranks, it is not sensitive to systematic errors in the calibration of the quantitative tests.
    • The AUC can be defined as The probability that a randomly selected case will have a higher test result than a randomly selected control.
    • Plot of sensitivity/specificity (y-axis) vs cutoff points of the biomarker
    • The Mann-Whitney U test statistic (or Wilcoxon or Kruskall-Wallis test statistic) is equivalent to the AUC (Mason, 2002)
    • The p-value of the Mann-Whitney U test can thus safely be used to test whether the AUC differs significantly from 0.5 (AUC of an uninformative test).
  • Calculate AUC by hand. AUC is equal to the probability that a true positive is scored greater than a true negative.
  • How to calculate Area Under the Curve (AUC), or the c-statistic, by hand or by R
  • Introduction to the ROCR package. Add threshold labels
  • http://freakonometrics.hypotheses.org/9066, http://freakonometrics.hypotheses.org/20002
  • Illustrated Guide to ROC and AUC
  • ROC Curves in Two Lines of R Code
  • Gini and AUC. Gini = 2*AUC-1.
  • Generally, an AUC value over 0.7 is indicative of a model that can distinguish between the two outcomes well. An AUC of 0.5 tells us that the model is a random classifier, and it cannot distinguish between the two outcomes.

Survival data

'Survival Model Predictive Accuracy and ROC Curves' by Heagerty & Zheng 2005

  • Recall Sensitivity= [math]\displaystyle{ P(\hat{p_i} \gt c | Y_i=1) }[/math], Specificity= [math]\displaystyle{ P(\hat{p}_i \le c | Y_i=0 }[/math]), [math]\displaystyle{ Y_i }[/math] is binary outcomes, [math]\displaystyle{ \hat{p}_i }[/math] is a prediction, [math]\displaystyle{ c }[/math] is a criterion for classifying the prediction as positive ([math]\displaystyle{ \hat{p}_i \gt c }[/math]) or negative ([math]\displaystyle{ \hat{p}_i \le c }[/math]).
  • For survival data, we need to use a fixed time/horizon (t) to classify the data as either a case or a control. Following Heagerty and Zheng's definition (Incident/dynamic), Sensitivity(c, t)= [math]\displaystyle{ P(M_i \gt c | T_i = t) }[/math], Specificity= [math]\displaystyle{ P(M_i \le c | T_i \gt 0 }[/math]) where M is a marker value or [math]\displaystyle{ Z^T \beta }[/math]. Here sensitivity measures the expected fraction of subjects with a marker greater than c among the subpopulation of individuals who die at time t, while specificity measures the fraction of subjects with a marker less than or equal to c among those who survive beyond time t.
  • The AUC measures the probability that the marker value for a randomly selected case exceeds the marker value for a randomly selected control
  • ROC curves are useful for comparing the discriminatory capacity of different potential biomarkers.

Confusion matrix, Sensitivity/Specificity/Accuracy

Predict
1 0
True 1 TP FN Sens=TP/(TP+FN)=Recall
FNR=FN/(TP+FN)
0 FP TN Spec=TN/(FP+TN)
PPV=TP/(TP+FP)
FDR=FP/(TP+FP)
NPV=TN/(FN+TN) N = TP + FP + FN + TN
  • Sensitivity = TP / (TP + FN) = Recall
  • Specificity = TN / (TN + FP)
  • Accuracy = (TP + TN) / N
  • False discovery rate FDR = FP / (TP + FP)
  • False negative rate FNR = FN / (TP + FN)
  • Positive predictive value (PPV) = TP / # positive calls = TP / (TP + FP) = 1 - FDR
  • Negative predictive value (NPV) = TN / # negative calls = TN / (FN + TN)
  • Prevalence = (TP + FN) / N.
  • Note that PPV & NPV can also be computed from sensitivity, specificity, and prevalence:
[math]\displaystyle{ \text{PPV} = \frac{\text{sensitivity} \times \text{prevalence}}{\text{sensitivity} \times \text{prevalence}+(1-\text{specificity}) \times (1-\text{prevalence})} }[/math]
[math]\displaystyle{ \text{NPV} = \frac{\text{specificity} \times (1-\text{prevalence})}{(1-\text{sensitivity}) \times \text{prevalence}+\text{specificity} \times (1-\text{prevalence})} }[/math]

Precision recall curve

Incidence, Prevalence

https://www.health.ny.gov/diseases/chronic/basicstat.htm

Calculate area under curve by hand (using trapezoid), relation to concordance measure and the Wilcoxon–Mann–Whitney test

genefilter package and rowpAUCs function

  • rowpAUCs function in genefilter package. The aim is to find potential biomarkers whose expression level is able to distinguish between two groups.
# source("http://www.bioconductor.org/biocLite.R")
# biocLite("genefilter")
library(Biobase) # sample.ExpressionSet data
data(sample.ExpressionSet)

library(genefilter)
r2 = rowpAUCs(sample.ExpressionSet, "sex", p=0.1)
plot(r2[1]) # first gene, asking specificity = .9

r2 = rowpAUCs(sample.ExpressionSet, "sex", p=1.0)
plot(r2[1]) # it won't show pAUC

r2 = rowpAUCs(sample.ExpressionSet, "sex", p=.999)
plot(r2[1]) # pAUC is very close to AUC now

Use and Misuse of the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve in Risk Prediction

http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/115/7/928

Performance evaluation

Some R packages

Comparison of two AUCs

NRI (Net reclassification improvement)

Maximum likelihood

Difference of partial likelihood, profile likelihood and marginal likelihood

Generalized Linear Model

Lectures from a course in Simon Fraser University Statistics.

Doing magic and analyzing seasonal time series with GAM (Generalized Additive Model) in R

Quasi Likelihood

Quasi-likelihood is like log-likelihood. The quasi-score function (first derivative of quasi-likelihood function) is the estimating equation.

Plot

https://strengejacke.wordpress.com/2015/02/05/sjplot-package-and-related-online-manuals-updated-rstats-ggplot/

Deviance, stats::deviance() and glmnet::deviance.glmnet() from R

  • It is a generalization of the idea of using the sum of squares of residuals (RSS) in ordinary least squares to cases where model-fitting is achieved by maximum likelihood. See What is Deviance? (specifically in CART/rpart) to manually compute deviance and compare it with the returned value of the deviance() function from a linear regression. Summary: deviance() = RSS in linear models.
  • https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/stats/versions/3.4.3/topics/deviance
  • Likelihood ratio tests and the deviance http://data.princeton.edu/wws509/notes/a2.pdf#page=6
  • Deviance(y,muhat) = 2*(loglik_saturated - loglik_proposed)
  • Interpreting Residual and Null Deviance in GLM R
    • Null Deviance = 2(LL(Saturated Model) - LL(Null Model)) on df = df_Sat - df_Null. The null deviance shows how well the response variable is predicted by a model that includes only the intercept (grand mean).
    • Residual Deviance = 2(LL(Saturated Model) - LL(Proposed Model)) = [math]\displaystyle{ 2(LL(y|y) - LL(\hat{\mu}|y)) }[/math], df = df_Sat - df_Proposed=n-p. ==> deviance() has returned.
    • Null deviance > Residual deviance. Null deviance df = n-1. Residual deviance df = n-p.
## an example with offsets from Venables & Ripley (2002, p.189)
utils::data(anorexia, package = "MASS")

anorex.1 <- glm(Postwt ~ Prewt + Treat + offset(Prewt),
                family = gaussian, data = anorexia)
summary(anorex.1)

# Call:
#   glm(formula = Postwt ~ Prewt + Treat + offset(Prewt), family = gaussian, 
#       data = anorexia)
# 
# Deviance Residuals: 
#   Min        1Q    Median        3Q       Max  
# -14.1083   -4.2773   -0.5484    5.4838   15.2922  
# 
# Coefficients:
#   Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)    
# (Intercept)  49.7711    13.3910   3.717 0.000410 ***
#   Prewt        -0.5655     0.1612  -3.509 0.000803 ***
#   TreatCont    -4.0971     1.8935  -2.164 0.033999 *  
#   TreatFT       4.5631     2.1333   2.139 0.036035 *  
#   ---
#   Signif. codes:  0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1
# 
# (Dispersion parameter for gaussian family taken to be 48.69504)
# 
# Null deviance: 4525.4  on 71  degrees of freedom
# Residual deviance: 3311.3  on 68  degrees of freedom
# AIC: 489.97
# 
# Number of Fisher Scoring iterations: 2

deviance(anorex.1)
# [1] 3311.263
  • In glmnet package. The deviance is defined to be 2*(loglike_sat - loglike), where loglike_sat is the log-likelihood for the saturated model (a model with a free parameter per observation). Null deviance is defined to be 2*(loglike_sat -loglike(Null)); The NULL model refers to the intercept model, except for the Cox, where it is the 0 model. Hence dev.ratio=1-deviance/nulldev, and this deviance method returns (1-dev.ratio)*nulldev.
x=matrix(rnorm(100*2),100,2)
y=rnorm(100)
fit1=glmnet(x,y) 
deviance(fit1)  # one for each lambda
#  [1] 98.83277 98.53893 98.29499 98.09246 97.92432 97.78472 97.66883
#  [8] 97.57261 97.49273 97.41327 97.29855 97.20332 97.12425 97.05861
# ...
# [57] 96.73772 96.73770
fit2 <- glmnet(x, y, lambda=.1) # fix lambda
deviance(fit2)
# [1] 98.10212
deviance(glm(y ~ x))
# [1] 96.73762
sum(residuals(glm(y ~ x))^2)
# [1] 96.73762

Saturated model

Simulate data

Density plot

# plot a Weibull distribution with shape and scale
func <- function(x) dweibull(x, shape = 1, scale = 3.38)
curve(func, .1, 10)

func <- function(x) dweibull(x, shape = 1.1, scale = 3.38)
curve(func, .1, 10)

The shape parameter plays a role on the shape of the density function and the failure rate.

  • Shape <=1: density is convex, not a hat shape.
  • Shape =1: failure rate (hazard function) is constant. Exponential distribution.
  • Shape >1: failure rate increases with time

Simulate data from a specified density

Signal to noise ratio

[math]\displaystyle{ \frac{\sigma^2_{signal}}{\sigma^2_{noise}} = \frac{Var(f(X))}{Var(e)} }[/math] if Y = f(X) + e

Some examples of signal to noise ratio

Effect size, Cohen's d and volcano plot

[math]\displaystyle{ \theta = \frac{\mu_1 - \mu_2} \sigma, }[/math]

Multiple comparisons

Take an example, Suppose 550 out of 10,000 genes are significant at .05 level

  1. P-value < .05 ==> Expect .05*10,000=500 false positives
  2. False discovery rate < .05 ==> Expect .05*550 =27.5 false positives
  3. Family wise error rate < .05 ==> The probablity of at least 1 false positive <.05

According to Lifetime Risk of Developing or Dying From Cancer, there is a 39.7% risk of developing a cancer for male during his lifetime (in other words, 1 out of every 2.52 men in US will develop some kind of cancer during his lifetime) and 37.6% for female. So the probability of getting at least one cancer patient in a 3-generation family is 1-.6**3 - .63**3 = 0.95.

False Discovery Rate

Suppose [math]\displaystyle{ p_1 \leq p_2 \leq ... \leq p_n }[/math]. Then

[math]\displaystyle{ \text{FDR}_i = \text{min}(1, n* p_i/i) }[/math].

So if the number of tests ([math]\displaystyle{ n }[/math]) is large and/or the original p value ([math]\displaystyle{ p_i }[/math]) is large, then FDR can hit the value 1.

However, the simple formula above does not guarantee the monotonicity property from the FDR. So the calculation in R is more complicated. See How Does R Calculate the False Discovery Rate.

Below is the histograms of p-values and FDR (BH adjusted) from a real data (Pomeroy in BRB-ArrayTools).

Hist bh.svg

And the next is a scatterplot w/ histograms on the margins from a null data.

Scatterhist.svg

q-value

q-value is defined as the minimum FDR that can be attained when calling that feature significant (i.e., expected proportion of false positives incurred when calling that feature significant).

If gene X has a q-value of 0.013 it means that 1.3% of genes that show p-values at least as small as gene X are false positives.

SAM/Significance Analysis of Microarrays

The percentile option is used to define the number of falsely called genes based on 'B' permutations. If we use the 90-th percentile, the number of significant genes will be less than if we use the 50-th percentile/median.

In BRCA dataset, using the 90-th percentile will get 29 genes vs 183 genes if we use median.

Multivariate permutation test

In BRCA dataset, using 80% confidence gives 116 genes vs 237 genes if we use 50% confidence (assuming maximum proportion of false discoveries is 10%). The method is published on EL Korn, JF Troendle, LM McShane and R Simon, Controlling the number of false discoveries: Application to high dimensional genomic data, Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, vol 124, 379-398 (2004).

String Permutations Algorithm

https://youtu.be/nYFd7VHKyWQ

Empirical Bayes Normal Means Problem with Correlated Noise

Solving the Empirical Bayes Normal Means Problem with Correlated Noise Sun 2018

The package cashr and the source code of the paper

Bayes

Bayes factor

Empirical Bayes method

Naive Bayes classifier

Understanding Naïve Bayes Classifier Using R

MCMC

Speeding up Metropolis-Hastings with Rcpp

offset() function

Offset in Poisson regression

  1. We need to model rates instead of counts
  2. More generally, you use offsets because the units of observation are different in some dimension (different populations, different geographic sizes) and the outcome is proportional to that dimension.

An example from here

Y  <- c(15,  7, 36,  4, 16, 12, 41, 15)
N  <- c(4949, 3534, 12210, 344, 6178, 4883, 11256, 7125)
x1 <- c(-0.1, 0, 0.2, 0, 1, 1.1, 1.1, 1)
x2 <- c(2.2, 1.5, 4.5, 7.2, 4.5, 3.2, 9.1, 5.2)

glm(Y ~ offset(log(N)) + (x1 + x2), family=poisson) # two variables
# Coefficients:
# (Intercept)           x1           x2
#     -6.172       -0.380        0.109
#
# Degrees of Freedom: 7 Total (i.e. Null);  5 Residual
# Null Deviance:	    10.56
# Residual Deviance: 4.559 	AIC: 46.69
glm(Y ~ offset(log(N)) + I(x1+x2), family=poisson)  # one variable
# Coefficients:
# (Intercept)   I(x1 + x2)
#   -6.12652      0.04746
#
# Degrees of Freedom: 7 Total (i.e. Null);  6 Residual
# Null Deviance:	    10.56
# Residual Deviance: 8.001 	AIC: 48.13

Offset in Cox regression

An example from biospear::PCAlasso()

coxph(Surv(time, status) ~ offset(off.All), data = data)
# Call:  coxph(formula = Surv(time, status) ~ offset(off.All), data = data)
#
# Null model
#   log likelihood= -2391.736 
#   n= 500 

# versus without using offset()
coxph(Surv(time, status) ~ off.All, data = data)
# Call:
# coxph(formula = Surv(time, status) ~ off.All, data = data)
#
#          coef exp(coef) se(coef)    z    p
# off.All 0.485     1.624    0.658 0.74 0.46
#
# Likelihood ratio test=0.54  on 1 df, p=0.5
# n= 500, number of events= 438 
coxph(Surv(time, status) ~ off.All, data = data)$loglik
# [1] -2391.702 -2391.430    # initial coef estimate, final coef

Offset in linear regression

Overdispersion

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overdispersion

Var(Y) = phi * E(Y). If phi > 1, then it is overdispersion relative to Poisson. If phi <1, we have under-dispersion (rare).

Heterogeneity

The Poisson model fit is not good; residual deviance/df >> 1. The lack of fit maybe due to missing data, covariates or overdispersion.

Subjects within each covariate combination still differ greatly.

Consider Quasi-Poisson or negative binomial.

Test of overdispersion or underdispersion in Poisson models

https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/66586/is-there-a-test-to-determine-whether-glm-overdispersion-is-significant

Negative Binomial

The mean of the Poisson distribution can itself be thought of as a random variable drawn from the gamma distribution thereby introducing an additional free parameter.

Binomial

Count data

Zero counts

Bias

Bias in Small-Sample Inference With Count-Data Models Blackburn 2019

Survival data

Censoring

Sample schemes of incomplete data

  • Type I censoring: the censoring time is fixed
  • Type II censoring
  • Random censoring
    • Right censoring
    • Left censoring
  • Interval censoring
  • Truncation

The most common is called right censoring and occurs when a participant does not have the event of interest during the study and thus their last observed follow-up time is less than their time to event. This can occur when a participant drops out before the study ends or when a participant is event free at the end of the observation period.

Definitions of common terms in survival analysis

  • Event: Death, disease occurrence, disease recurrence, recovery, or other experience of interest
  • Time: The time from the beginning of an observation period (such as surgery or beginning treatment) to (i) an event, or (ii) end of the study, or (iii) loss of contact or withdrawal from the study.
  • Censoring / Censored observation: If a subject does not have an event during the observation time, they are described as censored. The subject is censored in the sense that nothing is observed or known about that subject after the time of censoring. A censored subject may or may not have an event after the end of observation time.

In R, "status" should be called event status. status = 1 means event occurred. status = 0 means no event (censored). Sometimes the status variable has more than 2 states. We can uses "status != 0" to replace "status" in Surv() function.

  • status=0/1/2 for censored, transplant and dead in survival::pbc data.
  • status=0/1/2 for censored, relapse and dead in randomForestSRC::follic data.

How to explore survival data

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survival_analysis#Survival_analysis_in_R

  • Create graph of length of time that each subject was in the study

<syntaxhighlight lang='rsplus'>