Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 5 minor 41 references

Modeling EEG Spectral Features through Warped Functional Mixed Membership Models

T0 review · 5 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A Bayesian curve-registration model for functional mixed memberships separates the 1/f pink-noise feature from the alpha-band peak in EEG spectra and quantifies how age and clinical status shift the peak alpha frequency.

desk verdict A useful synthesis of Bayesian registration and functional mixed membership, but the central EEG claim rests on fixing rho=0 and selective simulation reporting. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.08762 v1 pith:LZNXWHJ6 submitted 2024-12-11 stat.ME stat.AP

Emma Landry , Damla Senturk , Shafali Jeste , Charlotte DiStefano , Abigail Dickinson , Donatello Telesca This is my paper · ORCID
classification stat.MEstat.AP MSC 62R1062F1562P10
keywords functionaldataanalysiscurveregistrationmixedmembershipmodelsBayesianhierarchicalEEGspectralpeakalphafrequencytimewarpingB-splinebasis
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Functional data like EEG spectra are often misaligned: the same physiological feature appears at different frequencies in different people. The paper proposes a Bayesian model in which each person's curve is not a single shared shape but a mixture of two population-level feature shapes, each delayed or stretched by a person-specific time warp. Fitting this model to resting-state EEG from children with and without autism separates the 1/f pink-noise background from the alpha-band peak and, through a regression on the warp functions, estimates how peak alpha frequency changes with age and diagnosis. The central payoff is that phase variation and amplitude/feature variation are estimated together, so the location of the alpha peak and the difference between groups can be quantified without pre-aligning curves by hand.

What carries the argument

The central object is the mixed-membership registration equation $Y_i(t)=c_i+\pi_i f_1(h_i(t))+(1-\pi_i)f_2(\rho(h_i(t)-t)+t)+\epsilon_i(t)$, where $f_1$ and $f_2$ are B-spline feature shapes, $\pi_i$ is the membership weight, $h_i$ is a subject-specific monotone time warp, and $\rho$ rescales the warp for the second feature. The warp functions are B-splines constrained to be monotone and boundary-fixing; monotonicity is imposed through the Jupp transformation, which maps the constrained spline coefficients to an unconstrained space where a linear regression $E[\tilde{\eta}_i]=\tilde{\Upsilon}+B'X_i$ can be placed on warp coefficients. That regression is what lets age, diagnosis, and their interaction shift the peak $\alpha$ frequency, while the semi-supervised labeling of a few subjects anchors the two features to identifiable scientific meanings.

What would settle it

Run the same EEG case study with two freely estimated warp functions per subject, one per feature, instead of a single warp scaled by $\rho$; if the recovered 1/f shape, the posterior PAF distribution, or the age-by-diagnosis regression coefficients change materially, the paper's shared-warp assumption is the weak link. A simulation with two genuinely different warp shapes would show the same bias directly.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that curve registration and mixed membership can be combined in a single Bayesian hierarchical model in which each observed curve is $Y_i(t) = c_i + \pi_i f_1(h_i(t)) + (1-\pi_i) f_2(\rho(h_i(t)-t)+t) + \epsilon_i(t)$, with $f_1$ and $f_2$ B-spline feature shapes, $\pi_i$ the membership weight for feature 1, $h_i$ a monotone time-transformation function, and $\rho$ a warp rescaling for the second feature. Identifiability comes from anchoring warps at the identity, centering intercepts and feature levels, and assigning a small number of subjects to full membership in one feature. In the EEG case study, $\rho$ is fixed at zero, so the 1/f feature is effectively unwarped while the $\alpha$-peak feature is warped. The model recovers the 1/f pink-noise component separately from the $\alpha$ peak, produces a posterior distribution for peak $\alpha$ frequency concentrated near 9.4–9.5 Hz, and shows through the warp regression that typically developing (TD) children's PAF increases with age while ASD children's does not, with TD children loading more heavily on the peak feature.

Load-bearing premise

The model assumes a single shared time-warp shape per subject across both spectral features, with only a scalar rescaling $\rho$ telling the features apart, and in the EEG case study that rescaling is fixed at zero so the 1/f feature is not warped at all; if the true warps differ in shape between features, the recovered feature shapes and peak-$\alpha$-frequency estimates could be biased.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the model is right, EEG spectral analyses can estimate aligned feature shapes and subject-specific warps jointly, so the peak alpha frequency and its uncertainty are available directly from the posterior without a separate pre-registration step.
  • Separating the 1/f noise from the alpha-peak shape removes the aperiodic background as a confound, making group comparisons of the peak cleaner.
  • The warp regression supplies a quantitative age-by-diagnosis picture: the alpha peak moves to higher frequencies with age in typically developing children but stays nearly fixed in children with ASD, matching prior clinical findings.
  • The semi-supervised design shows that labelling only a few subjects (5% in the case study) is enough to identify the two features, so the method does not require full cluster labels.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A stress test the paper does not report: simulate from a generative model where the two features have genuinely different warp shapes rather than a common shape rescaled by $\rho$, then check whether the recovered 1/f shape and PAF-age regression become biased; this would directly probe the shared-warp assumption.
  • The Jupp-space warp regression could be extended from age and diagnosis to electrode-level or multivariate models, which the discussion gestures at; borrowing information across electrodes might sharpen the ASD age-interaction estimate in smaller samples.
  • The two-feature mixed-membership setup with registration is generic enough to transfer to other misaligned functional data with two interpretable subpopulations, such as gene-expression time courses, provided a few subjects can be labelled as pure types.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

5 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a Bayesian hierarchical curve registration model for functional mixed membership data with two features. Individual curves are modeled as mixtures of two population-level shapes, each subject has a time-transformation function modeled through B-splines with the Jupp transformation for monotonicity, and covariates enter through a regression model on the unconstrained warping coefficients. The method is applied to resting-state EEG spectral data from children with ASD and typically developing children. The central claims are that the model recovers the 1/f pink-noise feature distinctly from the alpha-band peak and that the regression component quantifies the effects of age and clinical designation on peak alpha frequency location.

Significance. If the central claims were fully supported, the paper would make a useful contribution by extending Bayesian curve registration to mixed membership models and by providing a principled way to regress warping functions on covariates. The Jupp-transformation framework for constrained warping and the semi-supervised identifiability strategy are appealing ideas. However, the current empirical evidence is substantially conditional: the simulation discards a non-negligible fraction of datasets that converge to a low-likelihood mode, the case study fixes the key warp-scaling parameter rho at 0 after observing bimodality, and the reported errors for feature 2 are computed after a post-hoc standardization that removes amplitude information. Because these decisions directly affect the two headline claims, the paper needs additional work before the conclusions can be accepted as stated.

major comments (5)
  1. [Section 3.2, Eq. (4)] The simulation study reports results only for datasets that converged to the high-likelihood mode, discarding 14 of 40 datasets for N=50, 11 of 40 for N=100, and 10 of 40 for N=150. The paper states that the remaining runs converged to biased values of rho and inaccurate shapes, but it does not report the corresponding error metrics over all datasets or provide diagnostics showing that the discarded runs are merely convergence failures rather than evidence of posterior multimodality. Because the simulation is the primary quantitative support for the method's ability to recover the true features and rho, reporting only favorable runs makes the MSE and R-MISE results conditional on the mode selected. The authors should report results including all datasets, or remedy the multimodality with better initialization, tempering, or additional identifiability constraints, and show that the conclusions are robust to this choice.
  2. [Section 3.1, Eqs. (25)-(26)] The central claim that the model 'recovers the 1/f pink noise feature distinctly from the peak in the alpha band' is weakened by the decision to fix rho=0 in the case study. The paper itself reports that the posterior for rho is bimodal with modes near 0 and near 1, and that at the rho=1 mode the 1/f shape acquires a small peak that can be warped. Setting rho=0 means the second feature is not warped at all, so the distinctness of the recovered 1/f shape is enforced by modeling choice rather than estimated from the data. This is load-bearing because the scientific interpretation of the recovered features and the subsequent peak-alpha-frequency regression depends on the warping specification. The authors should provide a sensitivity analysis over plausible values of rho, or develop an identifiability strategy that allows rho to be estimated reliably, and discuss how the recovered shapes and PAF regression change.
  3. [Section 3.1, Eq. (4)] The reported R-MISE for feature 2 is computed after standardizing both the true and estimated functions using Eqs. (25)-(26), which removes amplitude and level differences. The paper acknowledges a mismatch in amplitude for feature 2 and introduces the rescaling as a post-processing step. This means the simulation does not assess whether the model recovers the amplitude of the second feature, which is scientifically meaningful in the EEG application (e.g., peak prominence and group differences in loadings). The authors should report errors without the standardization, or justify the standardization as a principled identification condition rather than a correction applied after seeing the results.
  4. [Section 3.2] The simulation study fixes the generative value rho=0.4, while the case study fixes rho=0. No simulation is conducted for the rho=0 regime actually used in the data analysis, and no simulation is conducted for the bimodal scenario documented in the case study. Consequently, the simulation provides no direct evidence that the model works in the setting where the paper claims its main empirical result. The authors should include a simulation scenario with rho=0 and ideally a scenario with a bimodal posterior to examine whether the proposed workflow (including the decision to fix rho) yields unbiased estimates of the features and the PAF regression.
  5. [Section 3.2] The semi-supervised labeling of subjects in the case study is based on the data: subjects with the most prominent peaks are assigned to feature 2 and subjects with the poorest linear fit are assigned to feature 1. Because these same labeled subjects are then used to identify the features, this procedure can create a circularity that partly explains why the recovered feature 1 looks like 1/f noise and feature 2 looks like an alpha peak. The paper should report how sensitive the recovered shapes and the PAF regression are to the choice and number of labeled subjects, or use a labeling criterion that does not depend on the outcome being modeled.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 3] The abstract contains the placeholder 'Keywords and phrases: First keyword, second keyword.' and should be replaced with actual keywords.
  2. [Section 2.5.2] The text says the code is available in the package crMM 'available on Github (put link)'; the link is missing and must be provided for reproducibility.
  3. [Section 2.5.2] The posterior predictive fit in Eq. (18) applies the same warping function to both features and omits the rho rescaling used in the sampling model in Eq. (5). This is inconsistent unless rho=1 is assumed; the authors should clarify which quantity is being plotted and why.
  4. [Section 3.1] The sentence 'A simulation of twenty-five curves from the generative model described is illustrated in Figure 1' is ambiguous because the simulation study uses datasets of size N=50, 100, and 150; the twenty-five curves appear to refer only to the illustrative figure.
  5. [Section 3] The paper notes that the model is 'sensitive to prior choices' but does not report the tuning procedure or a sensitivity analysis. Since the case study hyperparameters are chosen after tuning for convergence, some summary of the sensitivity of the main conclusions to these choices would be helpful.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

The headline 'recovery' of a distinct 1/f feature and alpha peak is partly built into the semi-supervised labels and the post-hoc fixing of rho=0.

  1. self definitional [Section 3.2 (Case Study), semi-supervised labeling paragraph; Section 2.5.2 (Posterior Inference)]
    "We impose that 5% of the subjects are labeled; ... two individuals are set to have π1 = 1 and two to have π2 = 1. The set of individuals chosen to belong fully to the second feature are those who display the most prominent peak ... On the other hand, the set of individuals chosen to belong to the first feature are those that display pure 1/f noise, selecting the observations that do not display a peak."

    The abstract's central claim that the method 'recover[s] the 1/f pink noise feature distinctly from the peak in the alpha band' is presented as a free finding, but the identity of the two features is fixed before estimation: subjects with the largest spectral peaks are a priori assigned to one feature and subjects with the flattest 7-12 Hz spectra are assigned to the other. The model then 'recovers' exactly the peak-vs-1/f structure that was put in as semi-supervised labels. The shape details and PAF location are still estimated from all data, so this is partial rather than total circularity.

  2. fitted input called prediction [Section 3.2, paragraph beginning 'Issues were found to arise with the estimation of the parameter ρ', and Figure 5 discussion]
    "The posterior appeared to display two modes: one for a value close to 0, and one for a value close to 1. The sampler eventually converges to the latter, in which case the shape associated with the 1/f noise would also display a small peak that could get warped. ... As a result, ρ was set to be equal to 0 in the context of the case study, rather than being estimated. ... Regarding the 1/f noise, we find the recovered shape functions to not differ much between the warping and no warping models, which can be expected as it is assumed that ρ = 0."

    The clean separation between the alpha peak and a non-peaked 1/f feature is not a posterior prediction: after observing that the ρ ≈ 1 mode makes the 1/f feature acquire a warpable peak, the authors fix ρ = 0, which by Eq. (4) removes warping of the second feature. The paper itself says the resulting similarity to the no-warping model 'can be expected' because ρ = 0. Reporting this constrained output in the abstract as 'recovering the 1/f pink noise feature distinctly from the peak' turns a post-hoc identifiability constraint into a substantive finding.

full rationale

The methodological derivation is largely self-contained: the likelihood in Eqs. (1)-(6), the Jupp-space regression (9), the priors (10)-(17), and the MCMC scheme are independent of the substantive claims, and the PAF posterior (Fig. 7) and TD-vs-ASD membership comparison are data outputs, not numerically forced by literature values. The self-citations to Marco et al. (2024a,b) provide background for functional mixed membership models and do not carry a load-bearing uniqueness argument. However, the central abstract claim that the method recovers the 1/f pink noise feature distinctly from the peak in the alpha band is partially circular: the semi-supervised labels are selected by exactly the peak/no-peak contrast, and the warping scale ρ is fixed to 0 after the sampler finds a competing mode in which the 1/f shape acquires a peak. The paper is transparent about both choices, and the feature shapes are still estimated from data, so this is partial circularity rather than full equivalence of the derivation to its inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim relies on a specific generative model, identifiability assumptions, and manual choices (labels, knots, hyperparameters). No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (4)
  • rho (warp scaling for feature 2) = 0.4 (simulation truth); set to 0 in case study
    Controls how much the second feature is warped relative to the first. In the case study it is fixed to 0 after the posterior was bimodal, effectively disabling warping for the 1/f feature.
  • Semi-supervised labeling proportion and selection = 5% of subjects; 2 labeled to each feature via heuristic
    Labels are required for identifiability and scientific interpretability. The choice of which subjects are labeled (most prominent peak, lowest linear residual) affects the recovered shapes and PAF.
  • B-spline basis dimensions = p=15 shape knots (K=19), h=1 warp knot (Q=5)
    Chosen by hand; controls flexibility of the feature shapes and time-transformation functions.
  • g-prior scale = g=n=97
    For the regression coefficients on warping in the case study; chosen equal to the sample size.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Observed curves follow the generative mixed membership model with two features (Eq 1-2).
    This is the core structure; inference is only meaningful if the data approximately arise from this model.
  • domain assumption Time-transformation functions are monotonic and map the domain onto itself, enforced via ordered B-spline coefficients and the Jupp transformation.
    Assumed for identifiability and interpretability as stochastic schedules; Section 2.2.
  • standard math Ordered B-spline coefficients are a sufficient condition for monotonicity of the warping function (Brezger and Steiner, 2008).
    Used in Section 2.2 to impose monotonicity.
  • domain assumption Mixed membership models are identifiable under the separability condition, satisfied here by semi-supervised labeling (Chen et al., 2023; Marco et al., 2024a).
    Needed to resolve rescaling and label-switching ambiguities; Section 2.4.
  • domain assumption The first-order random walk penalty with block diagonal covariance is an appropriate prior for the feature spline coefficients.
    Adopted from Lang and Brezger (2004); assumes independent, smooth features.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Modeling EEG Spectral Features through Warped Functional Mixed Membership Models." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/LZNXWHJ6

@misc{pith2026241208762,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Modeling EEG Spectral Features through Warped Functional Mixed Membership Models},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/LZNXWHJ6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.08762}
}
read the original abstract

A common concern in the field of functional data analysis is the challenge of temporal misalignment, which is typically addressed using curve registration methods. Currently, most of these methods assume the data is governed by a single common shape or a finite mixture of population level shapes. We introduce more flexibility using mixed membership models. Individual observations are assumed to partially belong to different clusters, allowing variation across multiple functional features. We propose a Bayesian hierarchical model to estimate the underlying shapes, as well as the individual time-transformation functions and levels of membership. Motivating this work is data from EEG signals in children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Our method agrees with the neuroimaging literature, recovering the 1/f pink noise feature distinctly from the peak in the alpha band. Furthermore, the introduction of a regression component in the estimation of time-transformation functions quantifies the effect of age and clinical designation on the location of the peak alpha frequency (PAF).

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

41 extracted references · 37 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address author booktitle chapter edition editor howpublished institution journal key month note number organization pages publisher school series title type url volume year label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts #0 'before.all := #1 'mid.sentence := ...

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 global.max substring 't := if while FUNCTION word.in bbl.in capitalize " " * FUNCT...

  3. [3]

    and Kurtek, S

    Bharath, K. and Kurtek, S. (2020). Distribution on Warp Maps for Alignment of Open and Closed Curves. Journal of the American Statistical Association\/ , 115: 1378--1392

    work page 2020

  4. [4]

    and Steiner, W

    Brezger, A. and Steiner, W. J. (2008). Monotonic Regression Based on Bayesian P–Splines. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics\/ , 26: 90--104

    work page 2008

  5. [5]

    Brumback, L. C. and Lindstrom, M. J. (2004). Self Modeling with Flexible, Random Time Transformations. Biometrics\/ , 60: 461--470

    work page 2004

  6. [6]

    Chen, Y., He, S., Yang, Y., and Liang, F. (2023). Learning Topic Models: Identifiability and Finite-Sample Analysis. Journal of the American Statistical Association\/

    work page 2023

  7. [7]

    L., and Huang, X

    Cheng, W., Dryden, I. L., and Huang, X. (2016). Bayesian Registration of Functions and Curves. Bayesian Analysis\/ , 11: 447--475

    work page 2016

  8. [8]

    W., and Slaets, L

    Claeskens, G., Silverman, B. W., and Slaets, L. (2010). A multiresolution approach to time warping achieved by a Bayesian prior-posterior transfer fitting strategy. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Statistical Methodology)\/ , 72: 673--694

    work page 2010

Show all 41 references
  1. [9]

    de Boor, C. (2001). A Practical Guide to Splines - Revised Edition\/ , volume 115. Springer

    2001

  2. [10]

    P., Hasler, R., Colin, J., Dayer, A., Aubry, J

    Deiber, M. P., Hasler, R., Colin, J., Dayer, A., Aubry, J. M., Baggio, S., Perroud, N., and Ros, T. (2020). Linking alpha oscillations, attention and inhibitory control in adult ADHD with EEG neurofeedback. NeuroImage : Clinical\/ , 25: 102145

    2020

  3. [11]

    Dickinson, A., DiStefano, C., Senturk, D., and Jeste, S. S. (2018). Peak alpha frequency is a neural marker of cognitive function across the autism spectrum. The European journal of neuroscience\/ , 47: 643

    2018

  4. [12]

    and Hooker, G

    Earls, C. and Hooker, G. (2017). Combining Functional Data Registration and Factor Analysis. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics\/ , 26: 296--305

    2017

  5. [13]

    C., Heiken, K., Chen, Y

    Edgar, J. C., Heiken, K., Chen, Y. H., Herrington, J. D., Chow, V., Liu, S., Bloy, L., Huang, M., Pandey, J., Cannon, K. M., Qasmieh, S., Levy, S. E., Schultz, R. T., and Roberts, T. P. (2015). Resting-State Alpha in Autism Spectrum Disorder and Alpha Associations with Thalami...

    2015

  6. [14]

    Erosheva, E., Fienberg, S., and Lafferty, J. (2004). Mixed-membership models of scientific publications. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America\/ , 101: 5220--5227

    2004

  7. [15]

    and Kneip, A

    Gasser, T. and Kneip, A. (1995). Searching for Structure in Curve Sample. Journal of the American Statistical Association\/ , 90: 1179

    1995

  8. [16]

    and Gasser, T

    Gervini, D. and Gasser, T. (2004). Self-Modelling Warping Functions. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Statistical Methodology)\/ , 66: 959--971

    2004

  9. [17]

    Jupp, D. L. (1978). Approximation to Data by Splines with Free Knots. SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis\/ , 15: 328--343

    1978

  10. [18]

    and Ramsay, J

    Kneip, A. and Ramsay, J. O. (2008). Combining Registration and Fitting for Functional Models. Journal of the American Statistical Association\/ , 103: 1155--1165

    2008

  11. [19]

    and Brezger, A

    Lang, S. and Brezger, A. (2004). Bayesian P-Splines. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics\/ , 13: 183--212

    2004

  12. [20]

    and Yang, M

    Liu, X. and Yang, M. C. (2009). Simultaneous curve registration and clustering for functional data. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis\/ , 53: 1361--1376

    2009

  13. [21]

    Lu, Y., Herbei, R., and Kurtek, S. (2017). Bayesian Registration of Functions With a Gaussian Process Prior. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics\/ , 26: 894--904

    2017

  14. [22]

    (2024 a )

    Marco, N., Şentürk, D., Jeste, S., DiStefano, C., Dickinson, A., and Telesca, D. (2024 a ). Functional Mixed Membership Models. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics\/ , 1--18

    2024

  15. [23]

    C., Dickinson, A., and Telesca, D

    Marco, N., Şentürk, D., Jeste, S., Distefano, C. C., Dickinson, A., and Telesca, D. (2024 b ). Flexible regularized estimation in high-dimensional mixed membership models. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis\/ , 194: 107931

    2024

  16. [24]

    Matuk, J., Bharath, K., Chkrebtii, O., and Kurtek, S. (2022). Bayesian Framework for Simultaneous Registration and Estimation of Noisy, Sparse and Fragmented Functional Data. Journal of the American Statistical Association\/ , 117: 1964

    2022

  17. [25]

    A., Fan, M., Owens, M., Sayama, H., and Gibb, B

    Miskovic, V., Ma, X., Chou, C. A., Fan, M., Owens, M., Sayama, H., and Gibb, B. E. (2015). Developmental changes in spontaneous electrocortical activity and network organization from early to late childhood. NeuroImage\/ , 118: 237--247

    2015

  18. [26]

    S., Lynn, P., Schermitzler, B., and Sponheim, S

    Ramsay, I. S., Lynn, P., Schermitzler, B., and Sponheim, S. (2021). Individual alpha peak frequency is slower in schizophrenia and related to deficits in visual perception and cognition. Scientific Reports 2021 11:1\/ , 11: 1--9

    2021

  19. [27]

    Ramsay, J. O. and Li, X. (1998). Curve registration. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Statistical Methodology)\/ , 60: 351--363

    1998

  20. [28]

    Ramsay, J. O. and Silverman, B. W. (1997). Functional Data Analysis\/ . Springer New York

    1997

  21. [29]

    Rønn, B. B. (2001). Nonparametric Maximum Likelihood Estimation for Shifted Curves. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology\/ , 63: 243--259

    2001

  22. [30]

    W., Telesca, D., Sugar, C

    Scheffler, A. W., Telesca, D., Sugar, C. A., Jeste, S., Dickinson, A., DiStefano, C., and Şentürk, D. (2019). Covariate-Adjusted Region-Referenced Generalized Functional Linear Model for EEG Data. Statistics in medicine\/ , 38: 5587

    2019

  23. [31]

    Shamshoian, J., Şentürk, D., Jeste, S., and Telesca, D. (2022). Bayesian analysis of longitudinal and multidimensional functional data. Biostatistics\/ , 23: 558--573

    2022

  24. [32]

    Srivastava, A., Wu, W., Kurtek, S., Klassen, E., and Marron, J. S. (2011). Registration of Functional Data Using Fisher-Rao Metric. arXiv preprint arXiv:1103.3817\/

    2011 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Stephens, M. (2000). Dealing With Label Switching in Mixture Models. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology\/ , 62: 795--809

    2000

  26. [34]

    Q., and Kim, W

    Tang, L., Zeng, P., Shi, J. Q., and Kim, W. S. (2023). Model-based joint curve registration and classification. Journal of Applied Statistics\/ , 50: 1178

    2023

  27. [35]

    A., Kreager, D

    Telesca, D., Erosheva, E. A., Kreager, D. A., and Matsueda, R. L. (2012). Modeling criminal careers as departures from a unimodal population age-crime curve: The case of marijuana use. Journal of the American Statistical Association\/ , 107: 1427--1440

    2012

  28. [36]

    and Inoue, L

    Telesca, D. and Inoue, L. Y. (2008). Bayesian Hierarchical Curve Registration. Journal of the American Statistical Association\/ , 103: 328--339

    2008

  29. [37]

    and Gasser, T

    Wang, K. and Gasser, T. (1997). Alignment of Curves by Dynamic Time Warping. The Annals of Statistics\/ , 25: 1251--1276

    1997

  30. [38]

    Synchronizing Sample Curves Nonparametrically

    --- (1999). Synchronizing Sample Curves Nonparametrically. The Annals of Statistics\/ , 27: 439--460

    1999

  31. [39]

    Wood, S. N. (2018). Introducing GAMs\/ , 161--194. Chapman and Hall/CRC

    2018

  32. [40]

    Xu, Y., Müller, P., and Telesca, D. (2016). Bayesian Inference for Latent Biologic Structure with Determinantal Point Processes. Biometrics\/ , 72: 955--964

    2016

  33. [41]

    and Telesca, D

    Zhang, Y. and Telesca, D. (2014). Joint Clustering and Registration of Functional Data. arXiv preprint arXiv:1403.7134\/

    2014 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.