اشترك بالحزمة الذهبية واحصل على وصول غير محدود شمرا أكاديميا
تسجيل مستخدم جديدWhen Does More Regularization Imply Fewer Degrees of Freedom? Sufficient Conditions and Counter Examples from Lasso and Ridge Regression
115
0
0.0
(
0
)
اسأل ChatGPT حول البحث
ﻻ يوجد ملخص باللغة العربية
Regularization aims to improve prediction performance of a given statistical modeling approach by moving to a second approach which achieves worse training error but is expected to have fewer degrees of freedom, i.e., better agreement between training and prediction error. We show here, however, that this expected behavior does not hold in general. In fact, counter examples are given that show regularization can increase the degrees of freedom in simple situations, including lasso and ridge regression, which are the most common regularization approaches in use. In such situations, the regularization increases both training error and degrees of freedom, and is thus inherently without merit. On the other hand, two important regularization scenarios are described where the expected reduction in degrees of freedom is indeed guaranteed: (a) all symmetric linear smoothers, and (b) linear regression versus convex constrained linear regression (as in the constrained variant of ridge regression and lasso).
قيم البحث
اقرأ أيضاً
Modern methods for learning from data depend on many tuning parameters, such as the stepsize for optimization methods, and the regularization strength for regularized learning methods. Since performance can depend strongly on these parameters, it is
important to develop comparisons between emph{classes of methods}, not just for particularly tuned ones. Here, we take aim to compare classes of estimators via the relative performance of the emph{best method in the class}. This allows us to rigorously quantify the tuning sensitivity of learning algorithms. As an illustration, we investigate the statistical estimation performance of ridge regression with a uniform grid of regularization parameters, and of gradient descent iterates with a fixed stepsize, in the standard linear model with a random isotropic ground truth parameter. (1) For orthogonal designs, we find the emph{exact minimax optimal classes of estimators}, showing they are equal to gradient descent with a polynomially decaying learning rate. We find the exact suboptimalities of ridge regression and gradient descent with a fixed stepsize, showing that they decay as either $1/k$ or $1/k^2$ for specific ranges of $k$ estimators. (2) For general designs with a large number of non-zero eigenvalues, we find that gradient descent outperforms ridge regression when the eigenvalues decay slowly, as a power law with exponent less than unity. If instead the eigenvalues decay quickly, as a power law with exponent greater than unity or exponentially, we find that ridge regression outperforms gradient descent. Our results highlight the importance of tuning parameters. In particular, while optimally tuned ridge regression is the best estimator in our case, it can be outperformed by gradient descent when both are restricted to being tuned over a finite regularization grid.
Applied statisticians use sequential regression procedures to produce a ranking of explanatory variables and, in settings of low correlations between variables and strong true effect sizes, expect that variables at the very top of this ranking are tr
uly relevant to the response. In a regime of certain sparsity levels, however, three examples of sequential procedures--forward stepwise, the lasso, and least angle regression--are shown to include the first spurious variable unexpectedly early. We derive a rigorous, sharp prediction of the rank of the first spurious variable for these three procedures, demonstrating that the first spurious variable occurs earlier and earlier as the regression coefficients become denser. This counterintuitive phenomenon persists for statistically independent Gaussian random designs and an arbitrarily large magnitude of the true effects. We gain a better understanding of the phenomenon by identifying the underlying cause and then leverage the insights to introduce a simple visualization tool termed the double-ranking diagram to improve on sequential methods. As a byproduct of these findings, we obtain the first provable result certifying the exact equivalence between the lasso and least angle regression in the early stages of solution paths beyond orthogonal designs. This equivalence can seamlessly carry over many important model selection results concerning the lasso to least angle regression.
In the multivariate regression, also referred to as multi-task learning in machine learning, the goal is to recover a vector-valued function based on noisy observations. The vector-valued function is often assumed to be of low rank. Although the mult
ivariate linear regression is extensively studied in the literature, a theoretical study on the multivariate nonlinear regression is lacking. In this paper, we study reduced rank multivariate kernel ridge regression, proposed by cite{mukherjee2011reduced}. We prove the consistency of the function predictor and provide the convergence rate. An algorithm based on nuclear norm relaxation is proposed. A few numerical examples are presented to show the smaller mean squared prediction error comparing with the elementwise univariate kernel ridge regression.
Regularization is an essential element of virtually all kernel methods for nonparametric regression problems. A critical factor in the effectiveness of a given kernel method is the type of regularization that is employed. This article compares and co
ntrasts members from a general class of regularization techniques, which notably includes ridge regression and principal component regression. We derive an explicit finite-sample risk bound for regularization-based estimators that simultaneously accounts for (i) the structure of the ambient function space, (ii) the regularity of the true regression function, and (iii) the adaptability (or qualification) of the regularization. A simple consequence of this upper bound is that the risk of the regularization-based estimators matches the minimax rate in a variety of settings. The general bound also illustrates how some regularization techniques are more adaptable than others to favorable regularity properties that the true regression function may possess. This, in particular, demonstrates a striking difference between kernel ridge regression and kernel principal component regression. Our theoretical results are supported by numerical experiments.
Selection of important covariates and to drop the unimportant ones from a high-dimensional regression model is a long standing problem and hence have received lots of attention in the last two decades. After selecting the correct model, it is also im
portant to properly estimate the existing parameters corresponding to important covariates. In this spirit, Fan and Li (2001) proposed Oracle property as a desired feature of a variable selection method. Oracle property has two parts; one is the variable selection consistency (VSC) and the other one is the asymptotic normality. Keeping VSC fixed and making the other part stronger, Fan and Lv (2008) introduced the strong oracle property. In this paper, we consider different penalized regression techniques which are VSC and classify those based on oracle and strong oracle property. We show that both the residual and the perturbation bootstrap methods are second order correct for any penalized estimator irrespective of its class. Most interesting of all is the Lasso, introduced by Tibshirani (1996). Although Lasso is VSC, it is not asymptotically normal and hence fails to satisfy the oracle property.
سجل دخول لتتمكن من نشر تعليقات
التعليقات
جاري جلب التعليقات
سجل دخول لتتمكن من متابعة معايير البحث التي قمت باختيارها
