M/02 — Higher Criticism + Model-X Knockoffs
Sparse signal detection with FDR control
Higher Criticism for global sparse-signal screening, paired with Model-X knockoffs for FDR-controlled variable selection on populations of strategies.
The mathematics
Higher Criticism
Suppose you observe p two-sided p-values from p hypothesis tests. Under the global null, the order statistics are distributed as the order statistics of p i.i.d. Uniform(0,1) variables, with j-th expected value j/(p+1). The Higher Criticism statistic compares the empirical CDF to its uniform expectation, scaled by the variance of a binomial under the null:
with α typically taken as 1/2. Donoho & Jin (2004) show that under the rare-and-weak alternative — a sparsity fraction p−β of non-nulls with effect size — HC is asymptotically optimal at the detection boundary that no thresholding rule can cross. As a side benefit the argmax j* gives a data-driven cutoff: reject the smallest j* p-values.
Model-X knockoffs
For p features X1, …, Xp with known joint distribution, a Model-X knockoff matrix X̃ satisfies two conditions:
- Pairwise exchangeability: for any subset S ⊆ {1,…,p},
- Conditional independence from the response:
Construct any feature-importance statistic Zj for the original variable and Z̃jfor its knockoff (e.g. lasso coefficients, regression z-scores). The knockoff statistic is
Under the null, the sign of Wj is symmetric and exchangeable. The knockoff filter picks the smallest threshold t such that
and selects S = {j : Wj ≥ t}. Theorem 3.4 of Candes et al. (2018) then gives finite-sample control of the modified false discovery rate
Worked example
p = 200 features; k = 10 truly non-null with effect A = 3.0; the remaining 190 are pure N(0, 1). Compare three procedures:
- Naive |z| > 1.96: selects ~14 features (10 true + ~4 null) but as p grows the false-discovery proportion explodes by 2.5% × p / k.
- Higher Criticism: selects the smallest j* p-values where j* = argmax HC. With sparse signal at A = 3, j* lands near the true k.
- Knockoff filter at q = 0.10: selects ~9 features, expected ≤ 1 false discovery.
The demo below regenerates the experiment live. Note that as A → 0 (weak signal) the knockoff filter correctly returns the empty set rather than fabricate selections — a property no naive thresholding rule has.
Demo — Higher Criticism vs Model-X Knockoffs
p features, k true non-nulls with effect size A. Knockoffs control FDR at level q; HC chooses a data-driven threshold from the empirical p-value process.
Histogram of W statistics. Amber overlay = true non-nulls. The vertical green line is the knockoff threshold +t; everything to the right is selected. Note that under H0, W is symmetric about 0 — that’s what makes the FDR control work.
Figures
Why this matters for systematic strategies
A strategy pool with p = 38,000 parameter combinations on a single asset will produce several thousand nominally significant t-statistics under any unadjusted threshold. The standard remedy in finance has been Bonferroni (too conservative, kills real signals) or BH-FDR (correct under independence, broken under arbitrary dependence). Knockoffs are designed for the dependence structure that pools of trading strategies actually exhibit: they share market data, indicator families, parameter neighbourhoods.
Combined use: run Higher Criticism on the pool first. If HC* is below its asymptotic null quantile, stop — there is no detectable signal at this sparsity. If HC* is above, run knockoffs to extract the responsible features at controlled FDR.
Reproducibility
DaruFinance / hc-knockoffs
R — open source reference implementation
Minimal invocation
library(hc.knockoffs)
# Z: vector of per-strategy z-scores, length p
hc <- higher_criticism(Z)
hc$HC_star # global statistic
hc$selected # indices below the HC threshold
# Model-X knockoffs at FDR q = 0.10
sel <- knockoff_filter(Z, q = 0.10, method = "gaussian")
sel$tau # data-dependent threshold
sel$selected # selected feature indices
References
- [1]Donoho, D. & Jin, J. (2004). Higher criticism for detecting sparse heterogeneous mixtures. Annals of Statistics 32(3), 962–994.
- [2]Barber, R. F. & Candes, E. J. (2015). Controlling the false discovery rate via knockoffs. Annals of Statistics 43(5), 2055–2085.
- [3]Candes, E., Fan, Y., Janson, L. & Lv, J. (2018). Panning for gold: Model-X knockoffs for high-dimensional controlled variable selection. JRSS-B 80(3), 551–577.
- [4]Benjamini, Y. & Hochberg, Y. (1995). Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. JRSS-B 57(1), 289–300.