The lasso and related sparsity inducing algorithms have been the target of substantial theoretical and applied research. Correspondingly, many results are known about their behavior for a fixed or optimally chosen tuning parameter specified up to unk
nown constants. In practice, however, this oracle tuning parameter is inaccessible so one must use the data to select one. Common statistical practice is to use a variant of cross-validation for this task. However, little is known about the theoretical properties of the resulting predictions with such data-dependent methods. We consider the high-dimensional setting with random design wherein the number of predictors $p$ grows with the number of observations $n$. Under typical assumptions on the data generating process, similar to those in the literature, we recover oracle rates up to a log factor when choosing the tuning parameter with cross-validation. Under weaker conditions, when the true model is not necessarily linear, we show that the lasso remains risk consistent relative to its linear oracle. We also generalize these results to the group lasso and square-root lasso and investigate the predictive and model selection performance of cross-validation via simulation.
We derive generalization error bounds for traditional time-series forecasting models. Our results hold for many standard forecasting tools including autoregressive models, moving average models, and, more generally, linear state-space models. These n
on-asymptotic bounds need only weak assumptions on the data-generating process, yet allow forecasters to select among competing models and to guarantee, with high probability, that their chosen model will perform well. We motivate our techniques with and apply them to standard economic and financial forecasting tools---a GARCH model for predicting equity volatility and a dynamic stochastic general equilibrium model (DSGE), the standard tool in macroeconomic forecasting. We demonstrate in particular how our techniques can aid forecasters and policy makers in choosing models which behave well under uncertainty and mis-specification.
The lasso procedure is ubiquitous in the statistical and signal processing literature, and as such, is the target of substantial theoretical and applied research. While much of this research focuses on the desirable properties that lasso possesses---
predictive risk consistency, sign consistency, correct model selection---all of it has assumes that the tuning parameter is chosen in an oracle fashion. Yet, this is impossible in practice. Instead, data analysts must use the data twice, once to choose the tuning parameter and again to estimate the model. But only heuristics have ever justified such a procedure. To this end, we give the first definitive answer about the risk consistency of lasso when the smoothing parameter is chosen via cross-validation. We show that under some restrictions on the design matrix, the lasso estimator is still risk consistent with an empirically chosen tuning parameter.
The literature on statistical learning for time series assumes the asymptotic independence or ``mixing of the data-generating process. These mixing assumptions are never tested, nor are there methods for estimating mixing rates from data. We give an
estimator for the $beta$-mixing rate based on a single stationary sample path and show it is $L_1$-risk consistent.
