Skip to main content
[Preprint]. 2024 Oct 22:2023.09.17.558092. Originally published 2023 Sep 17. [Version 2] doi: 10.1101/2023.09.17.558092

Table 1: Synthetic data: Final MISA loss values (lower is better).

Each row represents the ground-truth (GT) subspace structure used to generate the data and each column represents the test subspace structure used to fit the model. The lowest loss value along the row is highlighted in bold, which determines the selected subspace. Approaches performing consistently well in relation to the ISI in Figure 3 will contain bold loss values only along the diagonal. The loss value is largely consistent with the ISI value, except that it incorrectly implies that MSIVA S5 is a better fit when S4 is used to generate the data. Further, the multimodal baseline results incorrectly imply that S3 and S1 are better when S1 and S4 are the ground-truth subspace structures, respectively. Overall, the differences in diagonal loss values between MSIVA and the unimodal baseline appear negligible considering the correspondingly negligible differences in ISI (Figure 3).

Unimodal Baseline S1Test S2Test S3Test S4Test S5Test
S1GT 42.692 42.884 42.762 42.992 43.230
S2GT 42.649 42.300 42.851 42.868 42.918
S3GT 42.720 42.858 42.635 43.100 43.256
S4GT 43.091 43.239 43.174 42.976 43.507
S5GT 43.401 43.010 43.497 43.773 42.021
MSIVA S1Test S2Test S3Test S4Test S5Test
S1GT 42.677 42.865 42.751 43.038 43.111
S2GT 42.656 42.229 42.628 42.764 42.749
S3GT 42.695 42.862 42.620 43.040 43.126
S4GT 42.689 42.397 41.120 39.937 33.609
S5GT 43.405 42.966 43.388 43.975 42.005
Multimodal Baseline S1Test S2Test S3Test S4Test S5Test
S1GT 23.824 23.947 23.819 24.028 24.274
S2GT 27.766 27.442 27.803 28.162 28.182
S3GT 23.931 24.029 23.779 24.036 24.229
S4GT 17.265 18.660 17.290 17.564 19.731
S5GT 36.764 36.359 36.758 37.265 35.262