. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Jan 27.

Published in final edited form as: J Comput Graph Stat. 2016 Nov 10;25(4):1272–1296. doi: 10.1080/10618600.2016.1164533

Table 5.3.

Quantitive comparison of computational performance on the chain model (in seconds). We see that the F-APISTA method attains the best timing performance among all methods. The SCIO(P) and CLIME methods are much slower than the other three methods.

d	PISTA	APISTA	F-APISTA	SCIO(P)	CLIME
200	0.8342(0.0248)	0.2693(0.0031)	0.1013(0.0022)	2.6572(0.1253)	8.5932(0.5396)
400	3.8782(0.0696)	1.2103(0.0368)	0.4559(0.0308)	25.451(2.5752)	48.235(5.3494)
800	30.014(0.3514)	6.5970(0.2338)	2.4283(0.2605)	315.87(34.638)	460.12(45.121)