Distributional Convergence of Subspace Estimates in FastICA: A Bootstrap Study

  • Jarkko Ylipaavalniemi
  • Nima Reyhani
  • Ricardo Vigário
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7191)


Independent component analysis (ICA) is possibly the most widespread approach to solve the blind source separation (BSS) problem. Many different algorithms have been proposed, together with an extensive body of work on the theoretical foundations and limits of the methods.

One practical concern about the use of ICA with real-world data is the reliability of its estimates. Variations of the estimates may stem from the inherent stochastic nature of the algorithm, or deviations from the theoretical assumptions. To overcome this problem, some approaches use bootstrapped estimates. The bootstrapping also allows identification of subspaces, since multiple separated components can share a common pattern of variation, when they belong to the same subspace. This is a desired ability, since real-world data often violates the strict independence assumption.

Based on empirical process theory, it can be shown that FastICA and bootstrapped FastICA are consistent and asymptotically normal. In the context of subspace analysis, the normal convergence is not satisfied. This paper shows such limitation, and how to circumvent it, when one can estimate the canonical directions within the subspace.


Independent Component Analysis Asymptotic Normality Normality Test Independent Component Analysis Blind Source Separation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Hyvärinen, A., Karhunen, J., Oja, E.: Independent component analysis: algorithms and applications. Wiley Interscience (2001)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Comon, P.: Independent Component Analysis, a new concept? Signal Processing 36(3), 287–314 (1994); Special issue on Higher-Order Statistics. hal-00417283CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cichocki, A., Amari, S.: Adaptive Blind Signal and Image Processing: Learning Algorithms and Applications. Wiley (2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hyvärinen, A.: Fast and robust fixed-point algorithms for independent component analysis. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks 10(3), 626–634 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hyvärinen, A., Oja, E.: Independent component analysis: algorithms and applications. Neural Networks 13(4-5), 411–430 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Oja, E., Yuan, Z.: The fastica algorithm revisited: Convergence analysis. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks 17(6), 1370–1381 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tichavsky, P., Koldovsky, Z., Oja, E.: Performance analysis of the fastica algorithm and cramer-rao bounds for linear independent component analysis. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing 54(4), 1189–1203 (2006)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ylipaavalniemi, J., Vigário, R.: Analyzing consistency of independent components: An fMRI illustration. NeuroImage 39(1), 169–180 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Harmeling, S., Meinecke, F., Müller, K.R.: Injecting noise for analysing the stability of ICA components. Signal Processing 84(2), 255–266 (2004)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Huettel, S.A., Song, A.W., McCarthy, G.: Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 1st edn. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland (2004)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ylipaavalniemi, J., Savia, E., Malinen, S., Hari, R., Vigário, R., Kaski, S.: Dependencies between stimuli and spatially independent fMRI sources: Towards brain correlates of natural stimuli. NeuroImage 48(1), 176–185 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ylipaavalniemi, J., Vigário, R.: Subspaces of Spatially Varying Independent Components in fMRI. In: Davies, M.E., James, C.J., Abdallah, S.A., Plumbley, M.D. (eds.) ICA 2007. LNCS, vol. 4666, pp. 665–672. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Reyhani, N., Ylipaavalniemi, J., Vigário, R., Oja, E.: Consistency and asymptotic normality of fastica and bootstrap fastica. Signal Processing (2011) (submitted)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    van der Vaart, A.W., Wellner, J.A.: Weak Convergence and Empirical Processes: With applications to Statistics. Springer, New York (1996)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Henze, N., Zirkler, B.: A class of invariant consistent tests for multivariate normality. Commun. Statist.-Theor. Meth. 19(10) (1990)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Anderson, T.: An Introduction to Multivariate Statistical Analysis. Wiley Interscience (2003)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ylipaavalniemi, J., Soppela, J.: Arabica: Robust ICA in a Pipeline. In: Adali, T., Jutten, C., Romano, J.M.T., Barros, A.K. (eds.) ICA 2009. LNCS, vol. 5441, pp. 379–386. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jarkko Ylipaavalniemi
    • 1
  • Nima Reyhani
    • 1
  • Ricardo Vigário
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Information and Computer ScienceAalto University School of ScienceAaltoFinland

Personalised recommendations