Literature DB >> 20366807

Why are nonlinear fits to data so challenging?

Mark K Transtrum1, Benjamin B Machta, James P Sethna.   

Abstract

Fitting model parameters to experimental data is a common yet often challenging task, especially if the model contains many parameters. Typically, algorithms get lost in regions of parameter space in which the model is unresponsive to changes in parameters, and one is left to make adjustments by hand. We explain this difficulty by interpreting the fitting process as a generalized interpolation procedure. By considering the manifold of all model predictions in data space, we find that cross sections have a hierarchy of widths and are typically very narrow. Algorithms become stuck as they move near the boundaries. We observe that the model manifold, in addition to being tightly bounded, has low extrinsic curvature, leading to the use of geodesics in the fitting process. We improve the convergence of the Levenberg-Marquardt algorithm by adding geodesic acceleration to the usual step.

Year:  2010        PMID: 20366807     DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.104.060201

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Phys Rev Lett        ISSN: 0031-9007            Impact factor:   9.161


  28 in total

1.  Workflow for generating competing hypothesis from models with parameter uncertainty.

Authors:  David Gomez-Cabrero; Albert Compte; Jesper Tegner
Journal:  Interface Focus       Date:  2011-03-30       Impact factor: 3.906

2.  Careful accounting of extrinsic noise in protein expression reveals correlations among its sources.

Authors:  John A Cole; Zaida Luthey-Schulten
Journal:  Phys Rev E       Date:  2017-06-27       Impact factor: 2.529

Review 3.  Computational models in the age of large datasets.

Authors:  Timothy O'Leary; Alexander C Sutton; Eve Marder
Journal:  Curr Opin Neurobiol       Date:  2015-01-29       Impact factor: 6.627

4.  Systematic reduction of a detailed atrial myocyte model.

Authors:  Daniel M Lombardo; Wouter-Jan Rappel
Journal:  Chaos       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 3.642

5.  Maximizing the information learned from finite data selects a simple model.

Authors:  Henry H Mattingly; Mark K Transtrum; Michael C Abbott; Benjamin B Machta
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-02-06       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Analysis of mcDESPOT- and CPMG-derived parameter estimates for two-component nonexchanging systems.

Authors:  Mustapha Bouhrara; David A Reiter; Hasan Celik; Kenneth W Fishbein; Richard Kijowski; Richard G Spencer
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2015-07-03       Impact factor: 4.668

7.  MRI of trabecular bone using a decay due to diffusion in the internal field contrast imaging sequence.

Authors:  Dionyssios Mintzopoulos; Jerome L Ackerman; Yi-Qiao Song
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2011-08       Impact factor: 4.813

Review 8.  Understanding metabolism with flux analysis: From theory to application.

Authors:  Ziwei Dai; Jason W Locasale
Journal:  Metab Eng       Date:  2016-09-22       Impact factor: 9.783

9.  Model reduction by manifold boundaries.

Authors:  Mark K Transtrum; Peng Qiu
Journal:  Phys Rev Lett       Date:  2014-08-29       Impact factor: 9.161

10.  Bayesian analysis of transverse signal decay with application to human brain.

Authors:  Mustapha Bouhrara; David A Reiter; Richard G Spencer
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2014-09-19       Impact factor: 4.668

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.