Source author record

Marina Bogomolov

Marina Bogomolov appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Methodology Applications math.ST Statistics Theory

Catalog footprint

What is connected

6works

4topics

4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Open graph Browse works

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

preprint2020arXiv

Filtering the rejection set while preserving false discovery rate control

Scientific hypotheses in a variety of applications have domain-specific structures, such as the tree structure of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD), the directed acyclic graph structure of the Gene Ontology (GO), or the spatial structure in genome-wide association studies. In the context of multiple testing, the resulting relationships among hypotheses can create redundancies among rejections that hinder interpretability. This leads to the practice of filtering rejection sets obtained from multiple testing procedures, which may in turn invalidate their inferential guarantees. We propose Focused BH, a simple, flexible, and principled methodology to adjust for the application of any pre-specified filter. We prove that Focused BH controls the false discovery rate under various conditions, including when the filter satisfies an intuitive monotonicity property and the p-values are positively dependent. We demonstrate in simulations that Focused BH performs well across a variety of settings, and illustrate this method's practical utility via analyses of real datasets based on ICD and GO.

preprint2015arXiv

Many Phenotypes without Many False Discoveries: Error Controlling Strategies for Multi-Traits Association Studies

The genetic basis of multiple phenotypes such as gene expression, metabolite levels, or imaging features is often investigated by testing a large collection of hypotheses, probing the existence of association between each of the traits and hundreds of thousands of genotyped variants. Appropriate multiplicity adjustment is crucial to guarantee replicability of findings, and False Discovery Rate (FDR) is frequently adopted as a measure of global error. In the interest of interpretability, results are often summarized so that reporting focuses on variants discovered to be associated to some phenotypes. We show that applying FDR-controlling procedures on the entire collection of hypotheses fails to control the rate of false discovery of associated variants as well as the average rate of false discovery of phenotypes influenced by such variants. We propose a simple hierarchical testing procedure which allows control of both these error rates and provides a more reliable basis for the identification of variants with functional effects. We demonstrate the utility of this approach through simulation studies comparing various error rates and measures of power for genetic association studies of multiple traits. Finally, we apply the proposed method to identify genetic variants which impact flowering phenotypes in Arabdopsis thaliana, expanding the set of discoveries.

preprint2015arXiv

Testing for replicability in a follow-up study when the primary study hypotheses are two-sided

When testing for replication of results from a primary study with two-sided hypotheses in a follow-up study, we are usually interested in discovering the features with discoveries in the same direction in the two studies. The direction of testing in the follow-up study for each feature can therefore be decided by the primary study. We prove that in this case the methods suggested in Heller, Bogomolov, and Benjamini (2014) for control over false replicability claims are valid. Specifically, we prove that if we input into the procedures in Heller, Bogomolov, and Benjamini (2014) the one-sided p-values in the directions favoured by the primary study, then we achieve directional control over the desired error measure (family-wise error rate or false discovery rate).

preprint2014arXiv

Deciding whether follow-up studies have replicated findings in a preliminary large-scale "omics' study"

We propose a formal method to declare that findings from a primary study have been replicated in a follow-up study. Our proposal is appropriate for primary studies that involve large-scale searches for rare true positives (i.e. needles in a haystack). Our proposal assigns an $r$-value to each finding; this is the lowest false discovery rate at which the finding can be called replicated. Examples are given and software is available.

preprint2013arXiv

Discovering findings that replicate from a primary study of high dimension to a follow-up study

We consider the problem of identifying whether findings replicate from one study of high dimension to another, when the primary study guides the selection of hypotheses to be examined in the follow-up study as well as when there is no division of roles into the primary and the follow-up study. We show that existing meta-analysis methods are not appropriate for this problem, and suggest novel methods instead. We prove that our multiple testing procedures control for appropriate error-rates. The suggested FWER controlling procedure is valid for arbitrary dependence among the test statistics within each study. A more powerful procedure is suggested for FDR control. We prove that this procedure controls the FDR if the test statistics are independent within the primary study, and independent or have dependence of type PRDS in the follow-up study. For arbitrary dependence within the primary study, and either arbitrary dependence or dependence of type PRDS in the follow-up study, simple conservative modifications of the procedure control the FDR. We demonstrate the usefulness of these procedures via simulations and real data examples.

preprint2011arXiv

Adjusting for selection bias in testing multiple families of hypotheses

In many large multiple testing problems the hypotheses are divided into families. Given the data, families with evidence for true discoveries are selected, and hypotheses within them are tested. Neither controlling the error-rate in each family separately nor controlling the error-rate over all hypotheses together can assure that an error-rate is controlled in the selected families. We formulate this concern about selective inference in its generality, for a very wide class of error-rates and for any selection criterion, and present an adjustment of the testing level inside the selected families that retains the average error-rate over the selected families.