Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 minor 84 references

Robust and Scalable Sure Screening of Fixed effects in Ultrahigh-dimensional Linear Mixed Models

T0 review · 0 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-06-29 · grok-4.3

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

Pith's one-line read DPD-SISP retains all relevant fixed effects with high probability in ultrahigh-dimensional linear mixed models even under contamination.

desk verdict DPD-SISP gives a proxy-transform plus DPD screening method for fixed effects in ultrahigh-dim LMMs when random effects are known, with sure-screening claims and robustness analysis. read the letter →

arxiv 2606.27789 v1 pith:UTN4ZVLJ submitted 2026-06-26 stat.ME stat.CO

Abhik Ghosh , Magne Thoresen This is my paper · ORCID
classification stat.MEstat.CO
keywords surescreeninglinearmixedmodelsultrahigh-dimensionaldatadensitypowerdivergencerobustvariableselectionfixedeffectslongitudinalanalysis
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

The paper develops a screening procedure for linear mixed models where the number of candidate fixed-effect covariates grows exponentially with sample size. It first applies a proxy-based transformation to remove dependence from the known random effects, then ranks covariates using marginal utilities built from minimum density power divergence. This combination yields a method that keeps every truly relevant covariate with probability approaching one at an exponential rate, while remaining stable when errors are non-Gaussian or the data contain outliers.

What carries the argument

Proxy-based transformation that decouples random-effects dependence, followed by minimum density power divergence marginal utilities for ranking covariates.

What would settle it

A dataset with known random effects, contaminated observations, and at least one relevant fixed effect that DPD-SISP consistently fails to retain across repeated samples.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The DPD-SISP procedure, constructed from a proxy transformation followed by minimum density power divergence marginal utilities, satisfies the sure screening property: every relevant fixed-effect covariate is retained with probability at least 1 minus a term that decays exponentially in sample size, under conditions that permit non-Gaussian errors and dimensionality that grows faster than any polynomial in the sample size. The same construction also delivers bounded influence functions and positive breakdown points, confirming robustness to contamination.

Load-bearing premise

The random effects are treated as known, which is required for the proxy transformation to remove their induced dependence.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • All relevant fixed effects are retained with exponentially high probability under general error distributions.
  • The procedure remains stable under data contamination and model misspecification.
  • It extends directly to conditional screening that incorporates prior information and to iterative refinement that reduces correlation masking.
  • Post-screening robust estimation of the retained fixed effects is feasible within the same framework.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If random effects can be estimated accurately from a pilot fit, the transformation step may still be usable in practice.
  • The same divergence-based utilities could be paired with other dependence-removing transformations in models beyond linear mixed effects.
  • Iterative refinement steps may also improve performance when covariates exhibit strong multicollinearity even without random effects.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

0 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes the DPD-SISP procedure for sure screening of fixed-effects covariates in ultrahigh-dimensional linear mixed models under the assumption of known random effects. A proxy-based transformation decouples the dependence induced by random effects, after which marginal utilities are constructed via minimum density power divergence to achieve robustness to contamination and misspecification. The central theoretical result is that DPD-SISP retains all relevant covariates with exponentially high probability under general conditions that allow non-Gaussian errors and nonpolynomial growth of dimensionality. The paper also supplies influence-function and breakdown-point analyses, extensions to conditional screening and iterative refinement, post-screening estimation, simulation studies, and an application to ADNI2 longitudinal data.

Significance. If the stated exponential-probability bounds and robustness properties hold under the given conditions, the work supplies a scalable, theoretically grounded screening method that directly addresses contamination and random-effects dependence in LMMs. The combination of sure-screening guarantees, explicit robustness metrics, and practical extensions (conditional screening, iteration) would be a useful addition to the ultrahigh-dimensional screening literature, particularly for longitudinal or clustered data applications.

minor comments (3)
  1. [Introduction / Abstract] The abstract and introduction repeatedly emphasize the 'known random effects' setting; a brief discussion of the practical consequences when random effects must be estimated (e.g., plug-in estimation error propagating into the proxy transformation) would strengthen the scope statement.
  2. [Simulation studies] Simulation tables should explicitly report the exact contamination fractions, the growth rate p/n, and the achieved sure-screening probability across replications so that readers can directly compare the exponential-probability claim with finite-sample behavior.
  3. [Method / Notation] Notation for the density-power-divergence tuning parameter and the proxy transformation matrix should be introduced once with a single consistent symbol and then used uniformly; occasional redefinition risks confusion in the theoretical sections.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive assessment of our manuscript proposing the DPD-SISP procedure for robust sure screening of fixed effects in ultrahigh-dimensional linear mixed models. The recommendation for minor revision is appreciated, and we will incorporate improvements to enhance clarity, presentation, and any minor points raised.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity detected

full rationale

The paper's central claims consist of theoretical sure-screening guarantees for DPD-SISP under explicitly stated conditions (known random effects, proxy transformation, minimum density-power-divergence utilities). These are presented as derived results with exponential probability bounds, allowing non-Gaussian errors and ultrahigh dimensionality, rather than any fitted parameter being relabeled as a prediction. No self-citations, ansatzes, or uniqueness theorems are invoked in the provided text to support the load-bearing steps, and the derivation chain remains independent of its own outputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 2 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the domain assumption that random effects are known (enabling the proxy transformation) and on standard regularity conditions for the sure screening property and density power divergence; no free parameters or invented entities are explicitly introduced in the abstract.

free parameters (1)
  • DPD tuning parameter
    Robustness-efficiency tradeoff parameter implicit in minimum density power divergence; value not specified in abstract.
assumptions (2)
  • domain assumption Random effects are known
    Abstract states the method applies 'with known random effects' to enable the proxy-based transformation.
  • domain assumption General conditions allowing non-Gaussian errors and nonpolynomial dimensionality growth
    Sure screening property is asserted to hold under these general conditions.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Robust and Scalable Sure Screening of Fixed effects in Ultrahigh-dimensional Linear Mixed Models." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/UTN4ZVLJ

@misc{pith2026260627789,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Robust and Scalable Sure Screening of Fixed effects in Ultrahigh-dimensional Linear Mixed Models},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/UTN4ZVLJ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2606.27789}
}
read the original abstract

In modern applications of linear mixed models, the number of candidate fixed-effects covariates can grow exponentially with the sample size, while dependence induced by random effects and possible data contamination pose substantial challenges for existing variable screening methods. We propose a robust and computationally efficient sure screening procedure for identifying relevant fixed-effects covariates in ultrahigh-dimensional linear mixed models with known random effects. The proposed method leverages a proxy-based transformation to decouple dependence induced by random effects, enabling screening via marginal analysis in a transformed regression model. Robustness is achieved by constructing marginal utilities based on minimum density power divergence, yielding stability under data contamination and model misspecification without sacrificing scalability. The resulting procedure, termed DPD-SISP, is shown to retain all relevant covariates (sure screening property) with exponentially high probability under general conditions, allowing for non-Gaussian errors and nonpolynomial growth of dimensionality. In addition, DPD-SISP exhibits strong robustness properties supported by influence function and breakdown point analyses. The framework is further extended to incorporate prior information through conditional screening, mitigate correlation-induced masking via iterative refinement, and enable robust post-screening estimation of fixed effects. Extensive simulation studies demonstrate competitive performance of DPD-SISP under ideal settings and substantial gains in stability under data contamination. Its practical utility is illustrated through an application to high-dimensional longitudinal data from the ADNI2 study. The proposed framework thus provides a unified, robust, and scalable approach for variable screening in ultrahigh-dimensional linear mixed models.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.27789 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Comparison of computational times for different robust estimators across 1000 replica￾tions under a simple low dimensional LMM with two fixed-effects (one intercept and one standard normal variable), q = 2 random-effects (in various specifications), true fixed-effect coefficient (1, 1), random-effects covariance 0.7Iq + 0.3Jq, and noise variance 1. Here robLMM refers the robust es￾timator of Koller (2016), HGD(γ) an… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Boxplots (with overlaid sample means) of MinMS required for sure screening [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Boxplots (with overlaid sample means) of MinMS required for sure screening [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Boxplots (with overlaid sample means) of MinMS required for sure screening [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Boxplots (with overlaid sample means) of MinMS required for sure screening [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Boxplots (with overlaid sample means) of computational times (in seconds) of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p030_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

84 extracted references · 3 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    and Yohai, V

    Agostinelli, C. and Yohai, V. J. (2016). Composite robust estimators for linear mixed models. Journal of the American Statistical Association , 111(516):1764--1774

    2016

  2. [2]

    and Shang, J

    Alabiso, A. and Shang, J. (2023). High-dimensional linear mixed model selection by partial correlation. Communications in Statistics-Theory and Methods , 52(18):6355--6380

    2023

  3. [3]

    and Tang, N

    Bai, Y. and Tang, N. (2026). Model-free feature screening for ultrahigh dimensional data with responses missing not at random. Journal of Multivariate Analysis , page 105605

    2026

  4. [4]

    Barut, E., Fan, J., and Verhasselt, A. (2016). Conditional sure independence screening. Journal of the American Statistical Association , 111(515):1266--1277

    2016

  5. [5]

    Basu, A., Ghosh, A., and Pardo, L. (2026). Statistical Inference based on the Density Power Divergence: The Robustness Perspective . Chapman and Hall/CRC

    2026

  6. [6]

    R., Hjort, N

    Basu, A., Harris, I. R., Hjort, N. L., and Jones, M. (1998). Robust and efficient estimation by minimising a density power divergence. Biometrika , 85(3):549--559

    1998

  7. [7]

    Basu, A., Shioya, H., and Park, C. (2011). Statistical inference: the minimum distance approach . CRC press

    2011

  8. [8]

    independent components

    Bell, A. J. and Sejnowski, T. J. (1997). The “independent components” of natural scenes are edge filters. Vision research , 37(23):3327--3338

    1997

Show all 84 references
  1. [9]

    Bradic, J., Claeskens, G., and Gueuning, T. (2020). Fixed effects testing in high-dimensional linear mixed models. Journal of the American Statistical Association , 115(532):pp. 1835--1850

    2020

  2. [10]

    Bratsberg, A., Ghosh, A., and Thoresen, M. (2024). Conditional variable screening for ultra-high dimensional longitudinal data with time interactions. Biometrical Journal , 66(8):e70005

    2024

  3. [11]

    Bratsberg, A., Thoresen, M., and Ghosh, A. (2025). Exponential consistency of m-estimators in generalized linear mixed models. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference , 235:106222

    2025

  4. [12]

    G., Fr \"o lich, L., Hausner, L., Minthon, L., Hansson, O., Wallin, A., Zetterberg, H., Blennow, K., et al

    Brinkmalm, A., Brinkmalm, G., Honer, W. G., Fr \"o lich, L., Hausner, L., Minthon, L., Hansson, O., Wallin, A., Zetterberg, H., Blennow, K., et al. (2014). Snap-25 is a promising novel cerebrospinal fluid biomarker for synapse degeneration in alzheimer’s disease. Molecular neu...

    2014

  5. [13]

    Chen, J., Yang, X., Dai, J., and Li, Y. (2025). Model-free feature screening based on data aggregation for ultra-high-dimensional longitudinal data. Stats , 8(4):99

    2025

  6. [14]

    Chu, W. (2016). Feature Screening for Ultra-High Dimensional Longitudinal Data . The Pennsylvania State University

    2016

  7. [15]

    and Victoria-Feser, M.-P

    Copt, S. and Victoria-Feser, M.-P. (2006). High-breakdown inference for mixed linear models. Journal of the American Statistical Association , 101(473):292--300

    2006

  8. [16]

    and Karran, E

    De Strooper, B. and Karran, E. (2016). The cellular phase of alzheimer’s disease. Cell , 164(4):603--615

    2016

  9. [17]

    Demidenko, E. (2013). Mixed models: theory and applications with R . John Wiley & Sons

    2013

  10. [18]

    and Li, R

    Fan, J. and Li, R. (2001). Variable selection via nonconcave penalized likelihood and its oracle properties. Journal of the American statistical Association , 96(456):1348--1360

    2001

  11. [19]

    and Lv, J

    Fan, J. and Lv, J. (2008). Sure independence screening for ultrahigh dimensional feature space. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology , 70(5):849--911

    2008

  12. [20]

    and Li, R

    Fan, Y. and Li, R. (2012). Variable selection in linear mixed effects models. Annals of statistics , 40(4):2043

    2012

  13. [21]

    Fan, Y., Qin, G., and Zhu, Z. Y. (2014). Robust variable selection in linear mixed models. Communications in Statistics-Theory and Methods , 43(21):4566--4581

    2014

  14. [22]

    F., Folstein, S

    Folstein, M. F., Folstein, S. E., and McHugh, P. R. (1975). Mini-mental state. Journal of psychiatric research , 12(3):189--198

    1975

  15. [23]

    Garcia, R. R. d. O. (2021). A robust lasso regression for linear mixed-effects models with diagnostic analysis . PhD thesis, Universidade de S \ A o Paulo

    2021

  16. [24]

    and Basu, A

    Ghosh, A. and Basu, A. (2013). Robust estimation for independent non-homogeneous observations using density power divergence with applications to linear regression. Electronic Journal of Statistics , 7:2420--2456

    2013

  17. [25]

    Ghosh, A., Jaenada, M., and Pardo, L. (2024). Robust adaptive variable selection in ultra-high dimensional linear regression models. Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation , 94(3):571--603

    2024

  18. [26]

    and Majumdar, S

    Ghosh, A. and Majumdar, S. (2020). Ultrahigh-dimensional robust and efficient sparse regression using non-concave penalized density power divergence. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory , 66(12):7812--7827

    2020

  19. [27]

    Ghosh, A., Ponzi, E., Sandanger, T., and Thoresen, M. (2023). Robust sure independence screening for nonpolynomial dimensional generalized linear models. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics , 50(3):1232--1262

    2023

  20. [28]

    and Thoresen, M

    Ghosh, A. and Thoresen, M. (2018). Non-concave penalization in linear mixed-effect models and regularized selection of fixed effects. AStA Advances in Statistical Analysis , 102(2):179--210

    2018

  21. [29]

    and Thoresen, M

    Ghosh, A. and Thoresen, M. (2021). A robust variable screening procedure for ultra-high dimensional data. Statistical Methods in Medical Research , 30(8):1816--1832

    2021

  22. [30]

    Gorstein, E., Aghdam, R., and Sol \' s-Lemus, C. (2025). Highdimmixedmodels. jl: Robust high-dimensional mixed-effects models across omics data. PLOS Computational Biology , 21(1):e1012143

    2025

  23. [31]

    Guo, W., Xie, J., Wang, B., Chen, W., Lu, X., Chaudhary, V., and Tatsuoka, C. (2026). Robust ultra-high-dimensional variable selection with correlated structure using group testing. arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.07258

    2026

  24. [32]

    He, Y., Zhang, L., Ji, J., and Zhang, X. (2019). Robust feature screening for elliptical copula regression model. Journal of Multivariate Analysis , 173:568--582

    2019

  25. [33]

    T., Carson, M

    Heneka, M. T., Carson, M. J., El Khoury, J., Landreth, G. E., Brosseron, F., Feinstein, D. L., Jacobs, A. H., Wyss-Coray, T., Vitorica, J., Ransohoff, R. M., et al. (2015). Neuroinflammation in alzheimer's disease. The Lancet Neurology , 14(4):388--405

    2015

  26. [34]

    Jana, S., Roy, S., Basu, A., and Ghosh, A. (2025). Asymptotic breakdown point analysis of the minimum density power divergence estimator under independent non-homogeneous setups. arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.12426

    2025

  27. [35]

    Jiang, J. (2019). Robust mixed model analysis . World Scientific

    2019

  28. [36]

    Jiang, Y., Huang, X., Tan, J., and Jiang, R. (2025). Robust feature screening via grothendieck’s correlation with fdr control. Statistics and Computing , 35(5):141

    2025

  29. [37]

    Kessy, A., Lewin, A., and Strimmer, K. (2018). Optimal whitening and decorrelation. The American Statistician , 72(4):309--314

    2018

  30. [38]

    Koller, M. (2016). robustlmm: an r package for robust estimation of linear mixed-effects models. Journal of statistical software , 75:1--24

    2016

  31. [39]

    V., Fazio, A., Shin, M., Kosodo, Y., Cani, I., et al

    Koufi, F.-D., Neri, I., Ramazzotti, G., Rusciano, I., Mongiorgi, S., Marvi, M. V., Fazio, A., Shin, M., Kosodo, Y., Cani, I., et al. (2023). Lamin b1 as a key modulator of the developing and aging brain. Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience , 17:1263310

    2023

  32. [40]

    Lai, P., Liang, W., Wang, F., and Zhang, Q. (2020). Feature screening of quadratic inference functions for ultrahigh dimensional longitudinal data. Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation , 90(14):2614--2630

    2020

  33. [41]

    Laird, N. M. and Ware, J. H. (1982). Random-effects models for longitudinal data. Biometrics , pages 963--974

    1982

  34. [42]

    Li, G., Peng, H., Zhang, J., and Zhu, L. (2012a). Robust rank correlation based screening. The Annals of Statistics , pages 1846--1877

  35. [43]

    Li, R., Zhong, W., and Zhu, L. (2012b). Feature screening via distance correlation learning. Journal of the American Statistical Association , 107(499):1129--1139

  36. [44]

    T., and Li, H

    Li, S., Cai, T. T., and Li, H. (2022). Inference for high-dimensional linear mixed-effects models: A quasi-likelihood approach. Journal of the American Statistical Association , 117(540):1835--1846

    2022

  37. [45]

    and Xu, C

    Li, X. and Xu, C. (2024). Feature screening with conditional rank utility for big-data classification. Journal of the American Statistical Association , 119(546):1385--1395

    2024

  38. [46]

    Li, Y., Li, R., Qin, Y., Lin, C., and Yang, Y. (2021). Robust group variable screening based on maximum lq-likelihood estimation. Statistics in Medicine , 40(30):6818--6834

    2021

  39. [47]

    Li, Y., Liu, H., and Li, R. (2023). Study of bayesian variable selection method on mixed linear regression models. Plos one , 18(3):e0283100

    2023

  40. [48]

    X., Wang, N., Zhou, L., and Zhu, J

    Li, Y., Wang, S., Song, P. X., Wang, N., Zhou, L., and Zhu, J. (2018). Doubly regularized estimation and selection in linear mixed-effects models for high-dimensional longitudinal data. Statistics and its Interface , 11(4):721

    2018

  41. [49]

    Long, J. M. and Holtzman, D. M. (2019). Alzheimer disease: an update on pathobiology and treatment strategies. Cell , 179(2):312--339

    2019

  42. [50]

    and B \"u hlmann, P

    Meinshausen, N. and B \"u hlmann, P. (2010). Stability selection. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology , 72(4):417--473

    2010

  43. [51]

    and Weihl, C

    Meyer, H. and Weihl, C. C. (2014). The vcp/p97 system at a glance: connecting cellular function to disease pathogenesis. Journal of cell science , 127(18):3877--3883

    2014

  44. [52]

    and Xiong, S

    Mu, W. and Xiong, S. (2014). Some notes on robust sure independence screening. Journal of Applied Statistics , 41(10):2092--2102

    2014

  45. [53]

    G., Weiner, M

    Mueller, S. G., Weiner, M. W., Thal, L. J., Petersen, R. C., Jack, C., Jagust, W., Trojanowski, J. Q., Toga, A. W., and Beckett, L. (2005a). The alzheimer's disease neuroimaging initiative. Neuroimaging Clinics , 15(4):869--877

  46. [54]

    G., Weiner, M

    Mueller, S. G., Weiner, M. W., Thal, L. J., Petersen, R. C., Jack, C. R., Jagust, W., Trojanowski, J. Q., Toga, A. W., and Beckett, L. (2005b). Ways toward an early diagnosis in alzheimer’s disease: the alzheimer’s disease neuroimaging initiative (adni). Alzheimer's & Dementia...

  47. [55]

    C., Schumacher, F

    Oliveira, D. C., Schumacher, F. L., and Lachos, V. H. (2023). The use of the em algorithm for regularization problems in high-dimensional linear mixed-effects models. Statistical Methods in Medical Research , page 09622802251399913

    2023

  48. [56]

    Pinheiro, J. C. and Bates, D. M. (2000). Mixed-effects models in S and S-PLUS . Springer

    2000

  49. [57]

    C., Liu, C., and Wu, Y

    Pinheiro, J. C., Liu, C., and Wu, Y. N. (2001). Efficient algorithms for robust estimation in linear mixed-effects models using the multivariate t distribution. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics , 10(2):249--276

    2001

  50. [58]

    P., Safran, M., and Lancet, D

    Rappaport, N., Twik, M., Plaschkes, I., Nudel, R., Iny Stein, T., Levitt, J., Gershoni, M., Morrey, C. P., Safran, M., and Lancet, D. (2017). Malacards: an amalgamated human disease compendium with diverse clinical and genetic annotation and structured search. Nucleic acids re...

    2017

  51. [59]

    Richardson, A. M. and Welsh, A. H. (1995). Robust restricted maximum likelihood in mixed linear models. Biometrics , pages 1429--1439

    1995

  52. [60]

    Rohart, F., San-Cristobal, M., and Laurent, B. (2013). Fixed effects selection in high dimensional linear mixed models. arXiv preprint arXiv:1301.6365

    2013 arXiv

  53. [61]

    Roy, S., Sarkar, S., Dutta, S., and Ghosh, A. K. (2024). On exact feature screening in ultrahigh-dimensional binary classification. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics , 33(2):448--462

    2024

  54. [62]

    F., and Greven, S

    R \"u gamer, D., Baumann, P. F., and Greven, S. (2022). Selective inference for additive and linear mixed models. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis , 167:107350

    2022

  55. [63]

    Saraceno, G., Ghosh, A., Basu, A., and Agostinelli, C. (2024). Robust estimation of fixed effect parameters and variances of linear mixed models: the minimum density power divergence approach. AStA Advances in Statistical Analysis , 108(1):127--157

    2024

  56. [64]

    Scheipl, F. (2011). spikeslabgam: Bayesian variable selection, model choice and regularization for generalized additive mixed models in r. Journal of statistical software , 43:1--24

    2011

  57. [65]

    Schelldorfer, J., B \"u hlmann, P., and van de Geer, S. (2011). Estimation for high-dimensional linear mixed-effects models using l (1)-penalization. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics , 38(2):197--214

    2011

  58. [66]

    Stelzer, G., Plaschkes, I., Oz-Levi, D., Alkelai, A., Olender, T., Zimmerman, S., Twik, M., Belinky, F., Fishilevich, S., Nudel, R., et al. (2016a). Varelect: the phenotype-based variation prioritizer of the genecards suite. BMC genomics , 17(Suppl 2):444

  59. [67]

    I., Nudel, R., Lieder, I., Mazor, Y., et al

    Stelzer, G., Rosen, N., Plaschkes, I., Zimmerman, S., Twik, M., Fishilevich, S., Stein, T. I., Nudel, R., Lieder, I., Mazor, Y., et al. (2016b). The genecards suite: from gene data mining to disease genome sequence analyses. Current protocols in bioinformatics , 54(1):1--30

  60. [68]

    K., and Welsh, A

    Sugasawa, S., Hui, F. K., and Welsh, A. H. (2025). Robust linear mixed models using hierarchical gamma-divergence. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics , pages 1--14

    2025

  61. [69]

    ADNIMERGE: Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative

    the ADNI team (2023). ADNIMERGE: Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative . R package version 0.0.1

    2023

  62. [70]

    Wang, T., Zheng, L., Li, Z., and Liu, H. (2017). A robust variable screening method for high-dimensional data. Journal of Applied Statistics , 44(10):1839--1855

    2017

  63. [71]

    Wang, Y.-G., Lin, X., and Zhu, M. (2005). Robust estimating functions and bias correction for longitudinal data analysis. Biometrics , 61(3):684--691

    2005

  64. [72]

    W., Veitch, D

    Weiner, M. W., Veitch, D. P., Aisen, P. S., Beckett, L. A., Cairns, N. J., Green, R. C., Harvey, D., Jack, C. R., Jagust, W., Liu, E., et al. (2013). The alzheimer's disease neuroimaging initiative: a review of papers published since its inception. Alzheimer's & Dementia , 9(5...

    2013

  65. [73]

    T., Welch, K

    West, B. T., Welch, K. B., and Galecki, A. T. (2022). Linear mixed models: a practical guide using statistical software . Chapman and Hall/CRC

    2022

  66. [74]

    Williams, J., Xu, S., and Ferreira, M. A. (2023). Bgwas: Bayesian variable selection in linear mixed models with nonlocal priors for genome-wide association studies. BMC bioinformatics , 24(1):194

    2023

  67. [75]

    Yan, L., Zhang, X., Lan, Z., Bandyopadhyay, D., Wu, Y., Initiative, A. D. N., et al. (2025). Variable screening and spatial smoothing in fr \'e chet regression with application to diffusion tensor imaging. The Annals of Applied Statistics , 19(1):655--679

    2025

  68. [76]

    Yang, M. (2020). Bayesian mixed effects model with variable selection. Biostatistics and Biometrics Open Access Journal , 10(2):27--29

    2020

  69. [77]

    Yang, M., Wang, M., and Dong, G. (2020). Bayesian variable selection for mixed effects model with shrinkage prior. Computational Statistics , 35(1)

    2020

  70. [78]

    Yang, Y., Zhao, P., and Wu, D. (2024). Robust variable selection with exponential squared loss for linear mixed-effects models. Metrika , pages 1--27

    2024

  71. [79]

    and Tang, N

    Yi, J. and Tang, N. (2022). Variational bayesian inference in high-dimensional linear mixed models. Mathematics , 10(3):463

    2022

  72. [80]

    Yu, H., Wang, Y., and Zeng, D. (2023). A general framework of nonparametric feature selection in high-dimensional data. Biometrics , 79(2):951--963

    2023

  73. [81]

    Zgodic, A., Bai, R., Zhang, J., Olejua, P., and McLain, A. C. (2025). Sparse high-dimensional linear mixed modeling with a partitioned empirical bayes ecm algorithm. Statistics and Computing , 35(4):109

    2025

  74. [82]

    Zhang, Y. (2019). Variable screening and graphical modeling for ultra-high dimensional longitudinal data

    2019

  75. [83]

    J., Murray, C

    Zheng, P., Barber, R., Sorensen, R. J., Murray, C. J., and Aravkin, A. Y. (2021). Trimmed constrained mixed effects models: formulations and algorithms. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics , 30(3):544--556

    2021

  76. [84]

    E., and Taglialatela, G

    Zolochevska, O., Bjorklund, N., Woltjer, R., Wiktorowicz, J. E., and Taglialatela, G. (2018). Postsynaptic proteome of non-demented individuals with alzheimer’s disease neuropathology. Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease , 65(2):659--682

    2018

Pith tools

Reviewed June 29, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.