4.6 Article

A simple new approach to variable selection in regression, with application to genetic fine mapping

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/rssb.12388

关键词

Genetic fine mapping; Linear regression; Sparsity; Variable selection; Variational inference

资金

  1. Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation [HG002585]
  2. [4559]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We introduce a simple new approach to variable selection in linear regression, with a particular focus onquantifying uncertainty in which variables should be selected. The approach is based on a new model-the 'sum of single effects' model, called 'SuSiE'-which comes from writing the sparse vector of regression coefficients as a sum of 'single-effect' vectors, each with one non-zero element. We also introduce a corresponding new fitting procedure-iterative Bayesian stepwise selection (IBSS)-which is a Bayesian analogue of stepwise selection methods. IBSS shares the computational simplicity and speed of traditional stepwise methods but, instead of selecting a single variable at each step, IBSS computes adistributionon variables that captures uncertainty in which variable to select. We provide a formal justification of this intuitive algorithm by showing that it optimizes a variational approximation to the posterior distribution under SuSiE. Further, this approximate posterior distribution naturally yields convenient novel summaries of uncertainty in variable selection, providing a credible set of variables for each selection. Our methods are particularly well suited to settings where variables are highly correlated and detectable effects are sparse, both of which are characteristics of genetic fine mapping applications. We demonstrate through numerical experiments that our methods outperform existing methods for this task, and we illustrate their application to fine mapping genetic variants influencing alternative splicing in human cell lines. We also discuss the potential and challenges for applying these methods to generic variable-selection problems.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据