Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2021 Mar 18.
Published in final edited form as: IEEE Trans Inf Theory. 2019 Apr 11;65(8):4924–4939. doi: 10.1109/tit.2019.2909889

TABLE V.

Simulation results for Models 6–7 when the sparse factors are not exactly orthogonal.1

Model Method MSE-Est MSE-Pred FPR (%) FNR (%) Rank Rank (%) Orth
6 OLS 291.7 (133.9) 868.5 (403.1) 100 0
Lasso 11.8 (4.7) 71.9 (28.4) 10.3 0
RRR 17.6 (7.3) 69.5 (31.2) 100 0 3 100 0
SOFAR-L 2.2 (0.9) 14.1 (6.3) 8 0.1 3 100 0
RSSVD 2.0 (0.7) 13.6 (6.1) 7.3 0.1 3 100 22.7
SOFAR-GL 1.2 (0.5) 8.9 (3.9) 9.5 0 3 100 0
SRRR 3.5 (1.1) 28.7 (13.1) 36.2 0 3 100 5.6
7 OLS 1045.1 (122.4) 886.5 (403.4) 100 0
Lasso 33.2 (12.7) 79.9 (24.4) 3.2 0
RRR 754.0 (67.8) 35.2 (15.4) 100 0 3 99.7 0
SOFAR-L 1.2 (0.5) 3.1 (1.5) 2.4 0.2 3 100 0
RSSVD 4.8 (4.1) 8.5 (5.1) 2.4 1.7 3 99.7 64.4
SOFAR-GL 1.0 (0.4) 2.6 (1.1) 3.6 0 3 100 0
SRRR 4.3 (1.5) 13.9 (6.2) 20 0 3 100 45
1

Adaptive versions of Lasso, SOFAR-L, RSSVD, SOFAR-GL, and SRRR were applied. Means of performance measures with standard deviations in parentheses over 300 replicates are reported. MSE-Est values are scaled by multiplying 104 in Model 6 and 105 in Model 7, and MSE-Pred values are scaled by multiplying 103.