Speeding up Permutation Testing in Neuroimaging

Multiple hypothesis testing is a significant problem in nearly all neuroimaging studies. In order to correct for this phenomena, we require a reliable estimate of the Family-Wise Error Rate (FWER). The well known Bonferroni correction method, while simple to implement, is quite conservative, and can substantially under-power a study because it ignores dependencies between test statistics. Permutation testing, on the other hand, is an exact, non-parametric method of estimating the FWER for a given α-threshold, but for acceptably low thresholds the computational burden can be prohibitive. In this paper, we show that permutation testing in fact amounts to populating the columns of a very large matrix P. By analyzing the spectrum of this matrix, under certain conditions, we see that P has a low-rank plus a low-variance residual decomposition which makes it suitable for highly sub-sampled - on the order of 0.5% - matrix completion methods. Based on this observation, we propose a novel permutation testing methodology which offers a large speedup, without sacrificing the fidelity of the estimated FWER. Our evaluations on four different neuroimaging datasets show that a computational speedup factor of roughly 50× can be achieved while recovering the FWER distribution up to very high accuracy. Further, we show that the estimated α-threshold is also recovered faithfully, and is stable.

[1]  Robert D. Nowak,et al.  Online identification and tracking of subspaces from highly incomplete information , 2010, 2010 48th Annual Allerton Conference on Communication, Control, and Computing (Allerton).

[2]  Thomas E. Nichols,et al.  Controlling the familywise error rate in functional neuroimaging: a comparative review , 2003, Statistical methods in medical research.

[3]  Richard M. Leahy,et al.  A comparison of random field theory and permutation methods for the statistical analysis of MEG data , 2005, NeuroImage.

[4]  Yongchao Ge Resampling-based Multiple Testing for Microarray Data Analysis , 2003 .

[5]  Bilwaj Gaonkar,et al.  Analytic estimation of statistical significance maps for support vector machine based multi-variate image analysis and classification , 2013, NeuroImage.

[6]  Pablo A. Parrilo,et al.  Rank-Sparsity Incoherence for Matrix Decomposition , 2009, SIAM J. Optim..

[7]  Pablo A. Parrilo,et al.  Guaranteed Minimum-Rank Solutions of Linear Matrix Equations via Nuclear Norm Minimization , 2007, SIAM Rev..

[8]  Yogendra P. Chaubey Resampling-Based Multiple Testing: Examples and Methods for p-Value Adjustment , 1993 .

[9]  Emmanuel J. Candès,et al.  The Power of Convex Relaxation: Near-Optimal Matrix Completion , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory.

[10]  D. Altman,et al.  Multiple significance tests: the Bonferroni method , 1995, BMJ.

[11]  S. S. Young,et al.  Resampling-Based Multiple Testing: Examples and Methods for p-Value Adjustment , 1993 .

[12]  Gareth R. Barnes,et al.  Group imaging of task-related changes in cortical synchronisation using nonparametric permutation testing , 2003, NeuroImage.

[13]  J. Li,et al.  Adjusting multiple testing in multilocus analyses using the eigenvalues of a correlation matrix , 2005, Heredity.

[14]  Jeffrey T Leek,et al.  A general framework for multiple testing dependence , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[15]  J. Cheverud,et al.  A simple correction for multiple comparisons in interval mapping genome scans , 2001, Heredity.

[16]  P. Hall,et al.  Robustness of multiple testing procedures against dependence , 2009, 0903.0464.

[17]  Francisco Herrera,et al.  Advanced nonparametric tests for multiple comparisons in the design of experiments in computational intelligence and data mining: Experimental analysis of power , 2010, Inf. Sci..

[18]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Voxel-Based Morphometry—The Methods , 2000, NeuroImage.

[19]  Stephen P. Boyd,et al.  Rank minimization and applications in system theory , 2004, Proceedings of the 2004 American Control Conference.

[20]  M. Dwass Modified Randomization Tests for Nonparametric Hypotheses , 1957 .

[21]  John D. Storey,et al.  Statistical significance for genomewide studies , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[22]  Yi Ma,et al.  The Augmented Lagrange Multiplier Method for Exact Recovery of Corrupted Low-Rank Matrices , 2010, Journal of structural biology.

[23]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Why Voxel-Based Morphometry Should Be Used , 2001, NeuroImage.

[24]  Raj Rao Nadakuditi,et al.  The eigenvalues and eigenvectors of finite, low rank perturbations of large random matrices , 2009, 0910.2120.

[25]  H. Finner,et al.  Controlling the familywise error rate with plug‐in estimator for the proportion of true null hypotheses , 2009 .

[26]  Laura Balzano,et al.  Incremental gradient on the Grassmannian for online foreground and background separation in subsampled video , 2012, 2012 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.