Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 2 minor 1 cited by

KO-PDE-IDENT recovers exact PDE structures from noisy data by applying knockoff filters for FDR control followed by multi-criteria selection.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · grok-4.3

2026-07-01 16:20 UTC pith:KNDYOSYP

load-bearing objection KO-PDE-IDENT adds a knockoff-plus-SHAP pipeline and MCDM step to PDE discovery, but the exact-recovery claim hinges on two unverified assumptions that multicollinearity likely breaks. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2605.26631 v2 pith:KNDYOSYP submitted 2026-05-26 stat.AP cs.LG

Data-driven sparse identification of governing PDEs via knockoff filters and multi-criteria trade-offs

Pongpisit Thanasutives , Naichang Ke , Yoshinobu Kawahara This is my paper
classification stat.AP cs.LG
keywords PDE discoveryknockoff filtersfalse discovery ratesparse regressionmulti-criteria decision makingdata-driven modelingpartial differential equationsSHAP
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper introduces KO-PDE-IDENT as a framework that first mines a support set of candidate terms for partial differential equations using model-X knockoff filters to achieve finite-sample false discovery rate control. It then refines surviving terms via recursive feature elimination combined with SHAP-based statistics and selects the final equation through a multi-criteria decision-making process that weighs predictive accuracy, model complexity, and coefficient uncertainty. This targets the problem of extreme multicollinearity among candidate terms, which causes standard sparse regression to include spurious terms. A sympathetic reader would care because the method claims to deliver exact recovery of the true governing equation while eliminating all false discoveries on five canonical PDEs under severe noise.

Core claim

KO-PDE-IDENT constructs knockoff feature statistics by coupling l0-constrained adaptive best-subset selection with SHAP to produce an effective difference statistic, applies recursive feature elimination to remove terms whose marginal contributions are dispensable, and assesses statistical necessity through knockoff-perturbed hypothesis testing. The final governing equation is the alternative that best balances predictive accuracy, model complexity, and coefficient uncertainty in a multi-criteria decision-making formulation. Empirical evaluation on five canonical PDEs under severe noise corruption shows that the framework exactly recovers the true PDE structure, eliminates false discoveries

What carries the argument

Model-X knockoff filters with finite-sample FDR control, integrated with l0-constrained adaptive best-subset selection and SHAP for difference statistics, followed by recursive feature elimination and multi-criteria decision making.

Load-bearing premise

The initial library of candidate terms contains all true governing terms, and the knockoff construction produces valid finite-sample FDR control despite extreme multicollinearity among PDE candidate features.

What would settle it

A dataset generated from a known PDE where the initial library is complete but the method either includes a spurious term or misses a true term under high noise levels.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • The framework exactly recovers the true PDE structure from noisy observations.
  • It eliminates all false discoveries while retaining every true underlying term.
  • It achieves low coefficient estimation error on canonical PDEs under severe noise.
  • It provides valid finite-sample FDR control for PDE candidate terms despite multicollinearity.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the initial library assumption holds in practice, the method could support reliable discovery in domains where candidate terms are exhaustively enumerable.
  • The multi-criteria selection step could be tested on real experimental data to check whether it prefers physically interpretable equations over purely statistical fits.
  • Extensions might examine performance when the true terms lie outside the supplied library or when the data exhibit spatial or temporal correlations beyond the tested cases.

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

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript introduces KO-PDE-IDENT, a framework that first applies model-X knockoff filters (using an ℓ0-constrained adaptive best-subset + SHAP difference statistic) to produce a support set with finite-sample FDR control, then applies recursive feature elimination with knockoff-perturbed testing, and finally selects the governing PDE via multi-criteria decision making that trades off accuracy, complexity, and coefficient uncertainty. The central empirical claim is that the procedure exactly recovers the true sparse structure of five canonical PDEs from noisy data while eliminating all false discoveries.

Significance. If the knockoff construction and library-completeness assumptions hold, the work would supply the first PDE-discovery method with explicit finite-sample FDR control, directly addressing the multicollinearity problem that defeats standard sparse regression. The integration of SHAP with knockoffs and the subsequent MCDM step are technically novel contributions.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract, §3] Abstract and §3: the headline claim of exact recovery with zero false discoveries is load-bearing on the unverified assumption that the initial candidate library contains every true term; no sensitivity analysis or diagnostic is provided for the case in which a true term is omitted.
  2. [§4.2] §4.2: the SHAP-based difference statistic is asserted to yield valid finite-sample FDR control, yet no argument or diagnostic is given that exchangeability is preserved when candidate features are functionally dependent (polynomials and derivatives of the same field); standard knockoff theory does not automatically extend to this regime.
minor comments (2)
  1. [§4.1] Notation for the knockoff construction and the precise definition of the SHAP difference statistic should be collected in a single display equation rather than scattered across text.
  2. [§5] The five canonical PDE examples are referenced but the precise noise levels, sampling grids, and library sizes used in each case are not tabulated; a supplementary table would improve reproducibility.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the thoughtful and detailed comments. We respond to each major comment below and indicate the revisions that will be incorporated.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract, §3] Abstract and §3: the headline claim of exact recovery with zero false discoveries is load-bearing on the unverified assumption that the initial candidate library contains every true term; no sensitivity analysis or diagnostic is provided for the case in which a true term is omitted.

    Authors: We agree that the exact-recovery claims rest on the assumption that the candidate library is complete. This is a standard modeling assumption in the PDE-discovery literature, but the manuscript provides no sensitivity analysis for the case of a missing true term. In the revision we will add a new subsection that systematically removes true terms from the library, reports the resulting FDR and recovery rates, and discusses the implications for the method's guarantees. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§4.2] §4.2: the SHAP-based difference statistic is asserted to yield valid finite-sample FDR control, yet no argument or diagnostic is given that exchangeability is preserved when candidate features are functionally dependent (polynomials and derivatives of the same field); standard knockoff theory does not automatically extend to this regime.

    Authors: The referee is correct that the manuscript asserts finite-sample FDR control without supplying an explicit argument or diagnostic that exchangeability is preserved under the functional dependencies present in the PDE library. We will revise §4.2 to include (i) a brief theoretical discussion of why the ℓ0-constrained knockoff construction continues to satisfy the required exchangeability conditions and (ii) empirical diagnostics (swap tests and marginal correlation checks) confirming that the property holds for the polynomial and derivative features used in our experiments. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity detected

full rationale

The derivation relies on external knockoff filter methodology (model-X with FDR control) and standard techniques like RFE and MCDM, applied to an assumed-complete candidate library. Claims of exact recovery are presented as empirical outcomes on canonical PDEs rather than reductions by construction. No self-definitional steps, fitted inputs renamed as predictions, or load-bearing self-citations appear in the provided text; assumptions are stated explicitly without circular justification.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract alone provides no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities; the method description implies standard statistical assumptions about knockoff validity and candidate library completeness but does not enumerate them.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5793 in / 1104 out tokens · 41066 ms · 2026-07-01T16:20:27.255914+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We propose KO-PDE-IDENT, a data-driven framework for identifying parsimonious partial differential equations (PDEs) with false discovery rate (FDR) control. PDE discovery from noisy observations is often hindered by extreme multicollinearity among candidate terms, which causes typical sparse-regression methods to select spurious terms. To address this problem, KO-PDE-IDENT initially mines a support set of potential candidate terms via model-X knockoff filters with finite-sample FDR control, then refines and ranks the surviving PDE alternatives. The framework integrates three components. First, knockoff feature statistics are constructed by coupling $\ell_{0}$-constrained adaptive best-subset selection with SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP), yielding an effective and computationally efficient difference statistic. Second, a recursive feature elimination (RFE) procedure removes terms whose marginal contributions are dispensable and assesses statistical necessity through knockoff-perturbed hypothesis testing. Third, the final model selection is formulated as a multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) problem, where the optimal governing equation is the alternative that best balances a wide range of criteria such as predictive accuracy, model complexity and coefficient uncertainty. We evaluate KO-PDE-IDENT on five canonical PDEs under severe noise corruption. Empirical results show that our framework can exactly recover the true PDE structure, eliminating false discoveries while retaining all true underlying terms, with low coefficient estimation error.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.26631 by Naichang Ke, Pongpisit Thanasutives, Yoshinobu Kawahara.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Two-dimensional visualisation of noisy state variables for each PDE dataset. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Decision-matrix criteria for the 1D benchmarks. Each row shows three panels: (left) mean [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Decision-matrix criteria for the multi-component benchmarks. The RD [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Normalised MCDM preference scores for all benchmarks. Each panel shows the preference [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: AIC and EBIC scores against support size on the three 1D benchmarks. Lower is better. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p042_5.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Dynamics-aware identification of governing equations from sparse and noisy data

    cs.LG 2026-07 conditional novelty 4.0

    Dynamics-aware upsampling with Koopman/DMD models improves coefficient recovery in sparse noisy equation discovery, mostly for ODEs and some PDEs, but classical splines remain competitive.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

64 extracted references · 64 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Brunton, Joshua L

    Steven L. Brunton, Joshua L. Proctor, and J. Nathan Kutz. Discovering governing equations from data by sparse identification of nonlinear dynamical systems. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , 113(15):3932--3937, 2016

    work page 2016

  2. [2]

    Data-driven discovery of partial differential equations

    Samuel H Rudy, Steven L Brunton, Joshua L Proctor, and J Nathan Kutz. Data-driven discovery of partial differential equations . Science Advances , 3(4):e1602614, 2017

    work page 2017

  3. [3]

    Learning partial differential equations via data discovery and sparse optimization

    Hayden Schaeffer. Learning partial differential equations via data discovery and sparse optimization. Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences , 473(2197):20160446, 2017

    work page 2017

  4. [4]

    Nathan Kutz, and Steven L

    Kathleen Champion, Bethany Lusch, J. Nathan Kutz, and Steven L. Brunton. Data-driven discovery of coordinates and governing equations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , 116(45):22445--22451, 2019

    work page 2019

  5. [5]

    Nathan Kutz, and Steven L

    Kadierdan Kaheman, J. Nathan Kutz, and Steven L. Brunton. SINDy-PI : a robust algorithm for parallel implicit sparse identification of nonlinear dynamics. Proceedings of the Royal Society A , 476(2242):20200279, 2020

    work page 2020

  6. [6]

    Patrick A. K. Reinbold, Daniel R. Gurevich, and Roman O. Grigoriev. Using noisy or incomplete data to discover models of spatiotemporal dynamics. Physical Review E , 101(1):010203, 2020

    work page 2020

  7. [7]

    Messenger and David M

    Daniel A. Messenger and David M. Bortz. Weak SINDy for partial differential equations. Journal of Computational Physics , 443:110525, 2021

    work page 2021

  8. [8]

    Nathan Kutz, Bingni W

    Urban Fasel, J. Nathan Kutz, Bingni W. Brunton, and Steven L. Brunton. Ensemble- SINDy : Robust sparse model discovery in the low-data, high-noise limit, with active learning and control. Proceedings of the Royal Society A , 478(2260):20210904, 2022

    work page 2022

  9. [9]

    Brunton, J

    Peng Zheng, Travis Askham, Steven L. Brunton, J. Nathan Kutz, and Aleksandr Y. Aravkin. A unified framework for sparse relaxed regularized regression: SR3 . IEEE Access , 7:1404--1423, 2019

    work page 2019

  10. [10]

    Aravkin, Steven L

    Kathleen Champion, Peng Zheng, Aleksandr Y. Aravkin, Steven L. Brunton, and J. Nathan Kutz. A unified sparse optimization framework to learn parsimonious physics-informed models from data. IEEE Access , 8:169259--169271, 2020

    work page 2020

  11. [11]

    Mangan, J

    Niall M. Mangan, J. Nathan Kutz, Steven L. Brunton, and Joshua L. Proctor. Model selection for dynamical systems via sparse regression and information criteria. Proceedings of the Royal Society A , 473(2204):20170009, 2017

    work page 2017

  12. [12]

    Extended Bayesian information criteria for model selection with large model spaces

    Jiahua Chen and Zehua Chen. Extended Bayesian information criteria for model selection with large model spaces. Biometrika , 95(3):759--771, 2008

    work page 2008

  13. [13]

    Hirsh, David A

    Seth M. Hirsh, David A. Barajas-Solano, and J. Nathan Kutz. Sparsifying priors for Bayesian uncertainty quantification in model discovery. Royal Society Open Science , 9(2):211823, 2022

    work page 2022

  14. [14]

    North, Christopher K

    Joshua S. North, Christopher K. Wikle, and Erin M. Schliep. A Bayesian approach for data-driven dynamic equation discovery. Journal of Agricultural, Biological and Environmental Statistics , 27(4):728--747, 2022

    work page 2022

  15. [15]

    Gorodetsky

    Nicholas Galioto and Alex A. Gorodetsky. Bayesian system ID : optimal management of parameter, model, and measurement uncertainty. Nonlinear Dynamics , 102(1):241--267, 2020

    work page 2020

  16. [16]

    PDE-Net : Learning PDEs from data

    Zichao Long, Yiping Lu, Xianzhong Ma, and Bin Dong. PDE-Net : Learning PDEs from data. In Proceedings of the 35th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML) , volume 80 of Proceedings of Machine Learning Research , pages 3208--3216, 2018

    work page 2018

  17. [17]

    PDE-Net 2.0 : Learning PDEs from data with a numeric-symbolic hybrid deep network

    Zichao Long, Yiping Lu, and Bin Dong. PDE-Net 2.0 : Learning PDEs from data with a numeric-symbolic hybrid deep network. Journal of Computational Physics , 399:108925, 2019

    work page 2019

  18. [18]

    Cheeseman, Ivo F

    Suryanarayana Maddu, Bevan L. Cheeseman, Ivo F. Sbalzarini, and Christian L. M \"u ller. Stability selection enables robust learning of differential equations from limited noisy data. Proceedings of the Royal Society A , 478(2262):20210916, 2022

    work page 2022

  19. [19]

    Stability selection

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

    work page 2010

  20. [20]

    Panning for gold: `model- X ' knockoffs for high dimensional controlled variable selection

    Emmanuel Cand \`e s, Yingying Fan, Lucas Janson, and Jinchi Lv. Panning for gold: `model- X ' knockoffs for high dimensional controlled variable selection. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Statistical Methodology) , 80(3):551--577, 2018

    work page 2018

  21. [21]

    Cand \`e s

    Rina Foygel Barber and Emmanuel J. Cand \`e s. Controlling the false discovery rate via knockoffs. The Annals of Statistics , 43(5):2055--2085, 2015

    work page 2055

  22. [22]

    Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing

    Yoav Benjamini and Yosef Hochberg. Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological) , 57(1):289--300, 1995

    work page 1995

  23. [23]

    Derandomised knockoffs: leveraging e-values for false discovery rate control

    Zhimei Ren and Rina Foygel Barber. Derandomised knockoffs: leveraging e-values for false discovery rate control. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology , 86(1):122--154, 2024

    work page 2024

  24. [24]

    False discovery rate control with e-values

    Ruodu Wang and Aaditya Ramdas. False discovery rate control with e-values. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology , 84(3):822--852, 2022

    work page 2022

  25. [25]

    A polynomial algorithm for best-subset selection problem

    Junxian Zhu, Canhong Wen, Jin Zhu, Heping Zhang, and Xueqin Wang. A polynomial algorithm for best-subset selection problem. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , 117(52):33117--33123, 2020

    work page 2020

  26. [26]

    abess: A fast best-subset selection library in Python and R

    Jin Zhu, Xueqin Wang, Liyuan Hu, Junhao Huang, Kangkang Jiang, Yanhang Zhang, Shiyun Lin, and Junxian Zhu. abess: A fast best-subset selection library in Python and R . Journal of Machine Learning Research , 23(202):1--7, 2022

    work page 2022

  27. [27]

    Lundberg and Su-In Lee

    Scott M. Lundberg and Su-In Lee. A unified approach to interpreting model predictions. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 30 (NeurIPS 2017) , pages 4765--4774, 2017

    work page 2017

  28. [28]

    Lundberg, Gabriel Erion, Hugh Chen, Alex DeGrave, Jordan M

    Scott M. Lundberg, Gabriel Erion, Hugh Chen, Alex DeGrave, Jordan M. Prutkin, Bala Nair, Ronit Katz, Jonathan Himmelfarb, Nisha Bansal, and Su-In Lee. From local explanations to global understanding with explainable AI for trees. Nature Machine Intelligence , 2(1):56--67, 2020

    work page 2020

  29. [29]

    Akaike's information criterion and recent developments in information complexity

    Hamparsum Bozdogan. Akaike's information criterion and recent developments in information complexity. Journal of Mathematical Psychology , 44(1):62--91, 2000

    work page 2000

  30. [30]

    Adaptive uncertainty-penalized model selection for data-driven PDE discovery

    Pongpisit Thanasutives, Takashi Morita, Masayuki Numao, and Ken-ichi Fukui. Adaptive uncertainty-penalized model selection for data-driven PDE discovery. IEEE Access , 12:13165--13182, 2024

    work page 2024

  31. [31]

    A new look at the statistical model identification

    Hirotugu Akaike. A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control , 19(6):716--723, 1974

    work page 1974

  32. [32]

    Estimating the Dimension of a Model

    Gideon Schwarz. Estimating the Dimension of a Model . The Annals of Statistics , 6(2):461 -- 464, 1978

    work page 1978

  33. [33]

    Algorithmic Learning in a Random World

    Vladimir Vovk, Alexander Gammerman, and Glenn Shafer. Algorithmic Learning in a Random World . Springer, New York, 2005

    work page 2005

  34. [34]

    Tibshirani, and Larry Wasserman

    Jing Lei, Max G'Sell, Alessandro Rinaldo, Ryan J. Tibshirani, and Larry Wasserman. Distribution-free predictive inference for regression. Journal of the American Statistical Association , 113(523):1094--1111, 2018

    work page 2018

  35. [35]

    Cand \`e s

    Yaniv Romano, Evan Patterson, and Emmanuel J. Cand \`e s. Conformalized quantile regression. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 (NeurIPS 2019) , pages 3538--3548, 2019

    work page 2019

  36. [36]

    Fortin, and Thomas Lemieux

    Sergio Firpo, Nicole M. Fortin, and Thomas Lemieux. Unconditional quantile regressions. Econometrica , 77(3):953--973, 2009

    work page 2009

  37. [37]

    Allan H. Murphy. A new vector partition of the probability score. Journal of Applied Meteorology , 12(4):595--600, 1973

    work page 1973

  38. [38]

    Of quantiles and expectiles: consistent scoring functions, Choquet representations and forecast rankings

    Werner Ehm, Tilmann Gneiting, Alexander Jordan, and Fabian Kr \"u ger. Of quantiles and expectiles: consistent scoring functions, Choquet representations and forecast rankings. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Statistical Methodology) , 78(3):505--562, 2016

    work page 2016

  39. [39]

    Tilmann Gneiting and Adrian E. Raftery. Strictly proper scoring rules, prediction, and estimation. Journal of the American Statistical Association , 102(477):359--378, 2007

    work page 2007

  40. [40]

    Abbas Khosravi, Saeid Nahavandi, Doug Creighton, and Amir F. Atiya. Lower upper bound estimation method for construction of neural network-based prediction intervals. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks , 22(3):337--346, 2011

    work page 2011

  41. [41]

    Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications -- A State-of-the-Art Survey , volume 186 of Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems

    Ching-Lai Hwang and Kwangsun Yoon. Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications -- A State-of-the-Art Survey , volume 186 of Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems . Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1981

    work page 1981

  42. [42]

    Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS

    Serafim Opricovic and Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng. Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS . European Journal of Operational Research , 156(2):445--455, 2004

    work page 2004

  43. [43]

    The characteristic objects method: A new distance-based approach to multicriteria decision-making problems

    Wojciech Sa abun. The characteristic objects method: A new distance-based approach to multicriteria decision-making problems. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis , 22(1--2):37--50, 2015

    work page 2015

  44. [44]

    A preference ranking organisation method (the PROMETHEE method for multiple criteria decision-making)

    Jean-Pierre Brans and Philippe Vincke. A preference ranking organisation method (the PROMETHEE method for multiple criteria decision-making). Management Science , 31(6):647--656, 1985

    work page 1985

  45. [45]

    A combined compromise solution ( CoCoSo ) method for multi-criteria decision-making problems

    Morteza Yazdani, Pascale Zarate, Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas, and Zenonas Turskis. A combined compromise solution ( CoCoSo ) method for multi-criteria decision-making problems. Management Decision , 57(9):2501--2519, 2019

    work page 2019

  46. [46]

    Sparse learning of stochastic dynamical equations

    Lorenzo Boninsegna, Feliks N \"u ske, and Cecilia Clementi. Sparse learning of stochastic dynamical equations. The Journal of Chemical Physics , 148(24):241723, 2018

    work page 2018

  47. [47]

    Improving the stability of the knockoff procedure: Multiple simultaneous knockoffs and entropy maximization

    Jaime Roquero Gimenez and James Zou. Improving the stability of the knockoff procedure: Multiple simultaneous knockoffs and entropy maximization. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics , volume 89 of Proceedings of Machine Learning Research , pages 2184--2192. PMLR, 2019

    work page 2019

  48. [48]

    Kaptanoglu, Brian M

    Alan A. Kaptanoglu, Brian M. de Silva, Urban Fasel, Kadierdan Kaheman, Andy J. Goldschmidt, Jared L. Callaham, Charles B. Delahunt, Zachary G. Nicolaou, Kathleen Champion, Jean-Christophe Loiseau, J. Nathan Kutz, and Steven L. Brunton. PySINDy : A comprehensive Python package for robust sparse system identification. Journal of Open Source Software , 7(69)...

    work page 2022

  49. [49]

    Image denoising by sparse 3-D transform-domain collaborative filtering

    Kostadin Dabov, Alessandro Foi, Vladimir Katkovnik, and Karen Egiazarian. Image denoising by sparse 3-D transform-domain collaborative filtering. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing , 16(8):2080--2095, 2007

    work page 2080

  50. [50]

    Lee, Dennis L

    Jason D. Lee, Dennis L. Sun, Yuekai Sun, and Jonathan E. Taylor. Exact post-selection inference, with application to the lasso. The Annals of Statistics , 44(3):907--927, 2016

    work page 2016

  51. [51]

    Cand \`e s, and Richard J

    Rina Foygel Barber, Emmanuel J. Cand \`e s, and Richard J. Samworth. Robust inference with knockoffs. The Annals of Statistics , 48(3):1409--1431, 2020

    work page 2020

  52. [52]

    Marc \' lio and Danilo M

    Wilson E. Marc \' lio and Danilo M. Eler. From explanations to feature selection: assessing SHAP values as feature selection mechanism. Proceedings of SIBGRAPI 2020 , pages 340--347, 2020

    work page 2020

  53. [53]

    pymcdm -- the universal library for solving multi-criteria decision-making problems

    Bart omiej Kizielewicz, Andrii Shekhovtsov, and Wojciech Sa abun. pymcdm -- the universal library for solving multi-criteria decision-making problems. SoftwareX , 22:101368, 2023

    work page 2023

  54. [54]

    Liu, and Yucong Ma

    Zheng Tracy Ke, Jun S. Liu, and Yucong Ma. Power of knockoff: the impact of ranking algorithm, augmented design, and symmetric statistic. arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.08132 , 2020

    work page arXiv 2010

  55. [55]

    Powerful knockoffs via minimizing reconstructability

    Asher Spector and Lucas Janson. Powerful knockoffs via minimizing reconstructability. Annals of Statistics , 50(1):252--276, 2022

    work page 2022

  56. [56]

    Aggregation of multiple knockoffs

    Tuan-Binh Nguyen, Jerome-Alexis Chevalier, Bertrand Thirion, and Sylvain Arlot. Aggregation of multiple knockoffs. In Proceedings of the 37th International Conference on Machine Learning , volume 119 of Proceedings of Machine Learning Research , pages 7283--7293. PMLR, 2020

    work page 2020

  57. [57]

    The knockoff filter for FDR control in group-sparse and multitask regression

    Ran Dai and Rina Foygel Barber. The knockoff filter for FDR control in group-sparse and multitask regression. In Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Machine Learning , volume 48 of Proceedings of Machine Learning Research , pages 1851--1859. PMLR, 2016

    work page 2016

  58. [58]

    Noise-aware physics-informed machine learning for robust PDE discovery

    Pongpisit Thanasutives, Takashi Morita, Masayuki Numao, and Ken-ichi Fukui. Noise-aware physics-informed machine learning for robust PDE discovery . Machine Learning: Science and Technology , 4(1):015009, feb 2023

    work page 2023

  59. [59]

    Cand \`e s

    Rina Foygel Barber and Emmanuel J. Cand \`e s. A knockoff filter for high-dimensional selective inference. Annals of Statistics , 47(5):2504--2537, 2019

    work page 2019

  60. [60]

    de Silva, Kathleen Champion, Markus Quade, Jean-Christophe Loiseau, J

    Brian M. de Silva, Kathleen Champion, Markus Quade, Jean-Christophe Loiseau, J. Nathan Kutz, and Steven L. Brunton. PySINDy : A Python package for the sparse identification of nonlinear dynamical systems from data. Journal of Open Source Software , 5(49):2104, 2020

    work page 2020

  61. [61]

    Regression shrinkage and selection via the lasso

    Robert Tibshirani. Regression shrinkage and selection via the lasso. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological) , 58(1):267--288, 1996

    work page 1996

  62. [62]

    Tibshirani

    Jonathan Taylor and Robert J. Tibshirani. Statistical learning and selective inference. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , 112(25):7629--7634, 2015

    work page 2015

  63. [63]

    Tibshirani, Jonathan Taylor, Richard Lockhart, and Robert Tibshirani

    Ryan J. Tibshirani, Jonathan Taylor, Richard Lockhart, and Robert Tibshirani. Exact post-selection inference for sequential regression procedures. Journal of the American Statistical Association , 111(514):600--620, 2016

    work page 2016

  64. [64]

    Robust information criterion for model selection in sparse high-dimensional linear regression models

    Prakash Borpatra Gohain and Magnus Jansson. Robust information criterion for model selection in sparse high-dimensional linear regression models. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing , 71:2251--2266, 2023

    work page 2023