Statistical perspective on functional and causal neural connectomics: The Time-Aware PC algorithm
Fig 3
Comparative study of CFC inference.
(a) CFC inference by GC, DPGM, and TPC, is compared on three examples of motifs and simulation paradigms; from left to right: Linear Gaussian, Non-linear Non-Gaussian, CTRNN. Table: 4-neurons motifs that define the Ground Truth CFC (row 1) are depicted along with inferred CFC over several simulation instances according to the three different methods (row 2–4). Each inferred CFC has an edge v → w that corresponds to an edge detected in any of the inference instances. The percentage (blue) next to each edge indicates the number of times the edge was detected out of all instances. (b) IFPR (green), TP rate (orange) and Combined Score (purple) of each method are shown for each motif.