3
$\begingroup$

Given two vectors of random variables $X$ and $Y$, Canonical Correlation Analysis (CCA) finds the transformation matrices $A$ and $B$ so that $\operatorname{corr}(A_{1*} X, B_{1*} Y)$ is first maximal, $\operatorname{corr}(A_{2*} X, B_{2*} Y)$ is then maximal subject to $\operatorname{corr}(A_{1*} X, A_{2*} X) = 0$ and $\operatorname{corr}(B_{1*} Y, B_{2*} Y) = 0$, etc.

Is there any global objective function that $A$ and $B$ also optimize? For instance, do they maximize $\sum_i \operatorname{corr}(A_{i*} X, B_{i*} Y)$ subject to $A^TA=I$ and $B^TB=I$, or something around this line?

Related to that, if we define a transformation matrix $W = B^{-1}A$, is there any relation between $WX$ and $Y$ for which $W$ is optimal? In particular, is it possible to establish some connection between this transformation $W$ and the optimization objective of Ordinary Least Squares (OLS)?

$\endgroup$
7
$\begingroup$

If $X$ is $n\times p$ and $Y$ is $n\times q$, then one can formulate the CCA optimization problem for the first canonical pair as follows:

$$\text{Maximize }\operatorname{corr}(Xa, Yb).$$

The value of the correlation does not depend on the lengths of $a$ and $b$, so they can be arbitrarily fixed. It is convenient to fix them such that the projections have unit variances:

$$\text{Maximize }\operatorname{corr}(Xa, Yb) \text{ subject to } a^\top \Sigma_X a=1 \text{ and } b^\top \Sigma_Yb=1,$$

because then the correlation equals the covariance:

$$\text{Maximize } a^\top \Sigma_{XY}b \text{ subject to } a^\top \Sigma_X a=1 \text{ and } b^\top \Sigma_Yb=1,$$

where $\Sigma_{XY}$ is the cross-covariance matrix given by $X^\top Y/n$.


We can now generalize it to more than one dimension as follows:

$$\text{Maximize }\operatorname{tr}(A^\top \Sigma_{XY}B) \text{ subject to } A^\top \Sigma_X A=I \text{ and } B^\top \Sigma_Y B=I,$$

where the trace forms precisely the sum over successive canonical correlation coefficients, as you hypothesized in your question. You only had the constraints on $A$ and $B$ wrong.

The standard way to solve CCA problem is to define substitutions $\tilde A = \Sigma_X^{1/2} A$ and $\tilde B = \Sigma_Y^{1/2} B$ (conceptually this is equivalent to wightening both $X$ and $Y$), obtaining

$$\text{Maximize }\operatorname{tr}(\tilde A^\top \Sigma_X^{-1/2} \Sigma_{XY}\Sigma_Y^{-1/2} \tilde B) \text{ subject to } \tilde A^\top \tilde A=I \text{ and } \tilde B^\top \tilde B=I.$$

This is now easy to solve because of the orthogonality constraints; the solution is given by left and right singular vectors of $\Sigma_X^{-1/2} \Sigma_{XY}\Sigma_Y^{-1/2}$ (that can then easily be back-transformed to $A$ and $B$ without tildes).


Relationship to reduced-rank regression

CCA can be formulated as a reduced-rank regression problem. Namely, $A$ and $B$ corresponding to the first $k$ canonical pairs minimize the following cost function:

$$\Big\|(Y-XAB^\top)\Sigma_Y^{-1/2}\Big\|^2 = \Big\|Y\Sigma_Y^{-1/2}-XAB^\top\Sigma_Y^{-1/2}\Big\|^2.$$

See e.g. Torre, 2009, Least Squares Framework for Component Analysis, page 6 (but the text is quite dense and might be a bit hard to follow). This is called reduced-rank regression because the matrix of regression coefficients $AB^\top\Sigma_Y^{-1/2}$ is of low rank $k$.

In contrast, standard OLS regression minimizes

$$\|Y-XV\|^2$$

without any rank constraint on $V$. The solution $V_\mathrm{OLS}$ will generally be full rank, i.e. rank $\min(p,q)$.

Even in the $k=p=q$ situation there still remains one crucial difference: for CCA one needs to whiten dependent variables $Y$ by replacing it with $Y\Sigma_Y^{-1/2}$. This is because regression tries to explain as much variance in $Y$ as possible, whereas CCA does not care about the variance at all, it only cares about correlation. If $Y$ is whitened, then its variance in all directions is the same, and the regression loss function starts maximizing the correlation.

(I think there is no way to obtain $A$ and $B$ from $V_\mathrm{OLS}$.)

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Shouldn't it be $\operatorname{tr}(\tilde A^\top \Sigma_X^{-1/2} \Sigma_{XY}\Sigma_Y^{-1/2} \tilde B)$? Also, I would be very grateful if you could give me some clue about the second (and main) question. $\endgroup$ – statotito Mar 18 '16 at 21:06
  • $\begingroup$ @statotito Yes, of course there should be minuses, thanks! I fixed it. Regarding your second question: note that $B$ is a rectangular matrix of e.g. $q \times 2$ size in case one wants to extract $2$ canonical pairs. As such, it cannot be inverted and your $W=B^{-1}A$ does not really make sense. Do you have some context for your second question? I know several formulations of CCA that make it appear a bit similar to a regression problem, but none of them uses $B^{-1}$ (which is undefined). $\endgroup$ – amoeba Mar 18 '16 at 21:28
  • $\begingroup$ I am only interested in the case where both $X$ and $Y$ are $n \times p$ and we extract $p$ canonical pairs. In this particular case, $B$ would be a $p \times p$ square matrix, so $B^{-1}$ should be defined and I think that $W = B^{-1}A$ could make some sense (but I might be wrong). I am mainly interested in finding some connection between an $W$ that relates these $A$ and $B$ from CCA (be it defined as $W=B^{-1}A$ or some other way) and the optimization objective of ordinary least squares, possibly with some constraints. $\endgroup$ – statotito Mar 18 '16 at 21:46
  • $\begingroup$ Please see my update. $\endgroup$ – amoeba Mar 19 '16 at 0:01
  • $\begingroup$ My sense is CCA is quite closely related to RRR but the objective is different. CCA is more of an errors-in-variables method, much in the way TLS (total least squares or orthogonal least squares) is. RRR, the basis for Johansen's method, has a likelihood (conditional on rank) and one is minimizing the SSE for all the equations given cross-equation restrictions. CCA on the other hand, can be thought of as a regression where the independent variables are each observed with error. Each of these methods is a form of regularisation (if you actually reduce the rank). $\endgroup$ – NBF Aug 1 '18 at 12:05

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.