Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/3387168.3387208acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicvispConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

FCCA: A New Method of Constructing Causality Network Based on Graph Structure Information and Conditional Causality Test

Published: 25 May 2020 Publication History

Abstract

Pairwise granger causality test, which detects the causal connectivity between two nodes in a graph, has been widely used in various fields since it was proposed by economist Granger in 1969. However, pairwise granger causality test has the drawback of generating false positive causality, which is an indirect causal influence between two nodes mediated through a third node. In 1984, Geweke proposed the conditional Granger causality model, which enabled the model to eliminate false positive causal connectivity and accurately identify the causal relationships between two nodes in a high-dimensional dataset. The Matlab software tool GCCA realizes the calculation of conditional causality. For a given network, GCCA finds out all the triangular causal relationships (X~Y, Y~Z, X~Z) and calculates the causality among all three nodes. However, it is not necessary to calculate among all the three-node combinations as there may not be significant causal connectivity between any given two nodes. In additional, the full calculation of conditional granger causality could be slow. Here, we proposed a new test named Fast Causal Connectivity Analysis (FCCA) as a fast and approximative test for causal connectivity. We compared the performance of GCCA and FCCA using a time series fMRI dataset and showed that FCCA has acceptable accuracy and theoretically faster run time.

References

[1]
Alard Roebroeck, Elia Formisano, Rainer Goebel, Mapping directed influ-ence over the brain using Granger causality and fMRI, NeuroImage, Volume 25, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 230-242, ISSN 1053-8119, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.11.017.
[2]
Biswal, B. B. (2012). "Resting state fMRI: A personal history. [Review]". NeuroImage. 62 (2): 938--944.
[3]
Friston K J 2011 Functional and effective connectivity: a review Brain Con-nectivity 1 13--36
[4]
Granger C W J. Investigating causal relations by econometric models and cross-spectral methods[J]. Econometrica, 1969, 37(3): 424.
[5]
GUO S, SETH AK, KENDRICK KM, et al. Partial Granger causality-Eliminating exogenous inputs and latent variables.[J]. Journal of Neurosci-ence Methods, 2008,1(1).
[6]
Gweke J. Measurement ofLinear Dpendence and Feedback Between Multi-ple Time Series[J]. Journal of the AmericanStatistical Association, 1982, 77: 304--13.
[7]
Li Weiqun, two causal network research methods and their comparison, Oc-tober 2015, Hunan Normal University, master's degree thesis.
[8]
Matplotlib, https://matplotlib.org/
[9]
Networkx, http://networkx.github.io/
[10]
Pandas, http://pandas.pydata.org/
[11]
Park, Hae-Jeong & Friston, Karl. (2013). Structural and Functional Brain Networks: From Connections to Cognition. Science (New York, N.Y.). 342. 1238411. 10.1126/science.1238411.
[12]
Rokem, Ariel & Perez, Fernando & Trumpis, Michael. (2008). Nitime: time-series analysis for neuroimaging data.
[13]
Seth, A. K., A MATLAB toolbox for Granger causal connectivity analysis, Journal of Neuroscience Methods 186 (2010) 262--273
[14]
Seth, A. K., Barrett, A. B., & Barnett, L. (2015). Granger causality analysis in neuroscience and neuroimaging. The Journal of neuroscience: the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 35(8), 3293--3297.
[15]
Sharaev, Maksim G.; Zavyalova, Viktoria V.; Ushakov, Vadim L.; Kartash-ov, Sergey I.; Velichkovsky, Boris M. (2016). "Effective Connectivity with-in the Default Mode Network: Dynamic Causal Modeling of Resting-State fMRI Data". Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. 10: 14. PMC 4740785. PMID 26869900.
[16]
Statsmodels, http://www.statsmodels.org/stable/index.html
[17]
Wasserstein, Ronald L.; Lazar, Nicole A. The ASA's Statement on p-Values: Context, Process, and Purpose. The American Statistician. 7 March 2016, 70 (2): 129--133 [30 October 2016].
[18]
Wen X, Zhao X, Yao L, Wu X. Applications of granger causality model to connectivity network based on tMRI time series. ICNC, 2006, 422 1: 205--2 13.
[19]
Yu Yun. Conditional Granger Causality Analysis of Brain Default Network in Schizophrenic Patients [D]. Hunan Normal University, 2014.
[20]
Zhou Z, Jiao Y, Tang T, Lu Z, Liu Y. Detecting effective connectivity in human brain using granger causality. In; Proceedings of the 2008 inter-national conference on biomedical engineering.

Index Terms

  1. FCCA: A New Method of Constructing Causality Network Based on Graph Structure Information and Conditional Causality Test

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Other conferences
    ICVISP 2019: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Vision, Image and Signal Processing
    August 2019
    584 pages
    ISBN:9781450376259
    DOI:10.1145/3387168
    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 25 May 2020

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. Conditional Causality Test
    2. Topological information
    3. fMRI

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

    Conference

    ICVISP 2019

    Acceptance Rates

    ICVISP 2019 Paper Acceptance Rate 126 of 277 submissions, 45%;
    Overall Acceptance Rate 186 of 424 submissions, 44%

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • 0
      Total Citations
    • 52
      Total Downloads
    • Downloads (Last 12 months)3
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
    Reflects downloads up to 10 Nov 2024

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    View Options

    Get Access

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Media

    Figures

    Other

    Tables

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media