跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail

YOUR RESEARCH, IN SIGHT

让下一篇重要论文,不再错过。

覆盖计算机全学科,以 AI 为快捷入口。关注方向、作者和关键词,把发现变成持续的研究积累。

部分采集异常
正在读取账号与研究记录…

全站更新概况

+1087新增论文
+800其中 AI 相关
+64已有论文修订
+100新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:2026-11-06 10:06 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-06 10:05各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-05 10:33 — 2026-11-06 10:33(北京时间) · 点击数字查看对应简报;AI 相关包含在新增论文内。

最近完成检查:2026-11-06 10:06最近发现新增版本:2026-11-06 10:05库内论文最新更新时间:2026-11-05 12:54

每分钟刷新已保存的数据。空检查不代表采集异常;新收录可能包含历史论文。AI 导读按新增版本计数。

16,167 已收录论文13,917 AI 相关3,571 有修订112 HF 社区发现

浏览论文库

时间范围跟随排序:版本更新、本站收录或首次发表。最新收录可能包含历史论文。部分信源异常,查看状态 →

找到 1 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-06 10:04(北京时间)
新论文 · v1arXiv:2610.37883

fastC-GC and fastC-GC*: Efficient RCCP-Guided Graph Estimation for Time Series

S. A. Adedayo

We introduce fastC-GC and fastC-GC$^*$, computationally efficient methods for time-series graph estimation using the two-test rule motivated by Reichenbach's common cause principle (RCCP) and the conditioning sets of causalised Granger causality (c-GC and c-GC$^*$). The methods use standardized data, ridge-residual correlation, and complete circular shift enumeration evaluated by Fourier transforms. Shared precision calculations and Schur downdates avoid repeated regression fits. On a single-threaded benchmark, fastC-GC was 68-277 times faster than the compared c-GC implementation, and fastC-GC$^*$ was 192-886 times faster than c-GC$^*$. Across four suites with reference graphs, aggregate mean area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC) differed from the corresponding baseline by at most 0.019, but F1 was lower at the selected thresholds in every suite. The computational gains therefore accompany a change in estimator and selected graphs. Among eight methods, Bagged PCMCI+ had the highest mean AUPRC on sparse VAR, an autocorrelated structural process, and DREAM3; CUTS+ led on Lorenz-96. Wind-tunnel and river-discharge applications illustrate differences between inferred graphs without establishing causal accuracy. We prove the computational identities and a restricted population adjacency result for fastC-GC$^*$. Causal interpretation requires the stated graphical assumptions; validity of the implemented tests additionally requires a suitable shift-invariant null law. Empirical null rejection rates informed the conditional threshold $β= 0.005$, without establishing general test validity or graph-wide error control.

尚无 AI 解读,展示原文摘要

stat.CO · cs.SI · econ.EM
arXiv ↗PDF ↗