Source author record

Peter Buhlmann

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

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Catalog footprint

What is connected

2works
3topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

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.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2011arXiv

High-dimensional covariance estimation based on Gaussian graphical models

Undirected graphs are often used to describe high dimensional distributions. Under sparsity conditions, the graph can be estimated using $\ell_1$-penalization methods. We propose and study the following method. We combine a multiple regression approach with ideas of thresholding and refitting: first we infer a sparse undirected graphical model structure via thresholding of each among many $\ell_1$-norm penalized regression functions; we then estimate the covariance matrix and its inverse using the maximum likelihood estimator. We show that under suitable conditions, this approach yields consistent estimation in terms of graphical structure and fast convergence rates with respect to the operator and Frobenius norm for the covariance matrix and its inverse. We also derive an explicit bound for the Kullback Leibler divergence.

preprint2010arXiv

The adaptive and the thresholded Lasso for potentially misspecified models

We revisit the adaptive Lasso as well as the thresholded Lasso with refitting, in a high-dimensional linear model, and study prediction error, $\ell_q$-error ($q \in \{1, 2 \} $), and number of false positive selections. Our theoretical results for the two methods are, at a rather fine scale, comparable. The differences only show up in terms of the (minimal) restricted and sparse eigenvalues, favoring thresholding over the adaptive Lasso. As regards prediction and estimation, the difference is virtually negligible, but our bound for the number of false positives is larger for the adaptive Lasso than for thresholding. Moreover, both these two-stage methods add value to the one-stage Lasso in the sense that, under appropriate restricted and sparse eigenvalue conditions, they have similar prediction and estimation error as the one-stage Lasso, but substantially less false positives.