bioRxivNeurosciencePreprint
The expected behaviour of random fields in high dimensions: contradictions in the results of Bansal and Peterson (2018)
Abstract
Bansal and Peterson (2018) found that in simple stationary Gaussian simulations Random Field Theory incorrectly estimates the number of clusters of a Gaussian field that lie above a threshold. Their results contradict the existing literature and appear to have arisen due to errors in their code. Using reproducible code we demonstrate that in their simulations Random Field Theory correctly predicts the expected number of clusters and therefore that many of their results are invalid.
- Citations
- 1
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- The Impact of Random Models on Clustering Similarity
Alexander J. Gates, Yong‐Yeol Ahn·bioRxiv·Oct 1, 2017
- Including random effects in statistical models in ecology: fewer than five levels?
D. G. E. Gomes·bioRxiv·Apr 11, 2021
- Estimating plant abundance in irregular polygons: plot-based sampling with a conditional spatial configuration
C. Damgaard·bioRxiv·Aug 17, 2020
- Violating the normality assumption may be the lesser of two evils
U. Knief, W. Forstmeier·bioRxiv·May 5, 2020
- Reducing type II error in fMRI analysis: Cluster-extent threshold simulation results and an evaluation of current methods to correct for multiple comparisons
Scott D. Slotnick·Cognitive NeurosciencePeer-reviewed·Jan 2, 2026
- Incorporating sampling bias into permutation tests for niche and distribution models
D. L. Warren, J. M. Kass, … E. P. Economo·bioRxiv·Aug 8, 2022