← 返回文章列表

课程

ISE529 预测分析 · 考试复习

6 份课件的公式总表,加上按知识点整理的考试练习题,配上课件例题和作业题,每道题的答案折叠在题目下面。

散点与回归直线,上面写着课程名

这一页开头是 6 份课件的 公式总表,后面按 exam Practice 的 7 道题整理成 5 个知识点。每个知识点先列核心公式,再放考试题,最后放课件(Lecture)和作业(HW)里对应的例题。点击 查看答案 展开解答。

0. 公式总表(Lecture 01–06)

按课件顺序整理,括号里是课件页码。考试前从头到尾过一遍。

Lecture 01 · 概率与统计复习

常见分布

分布PMF / PDFE(X)E(X)Var⁡(X)\operatorname{Var}(X)
Bernoulli(p)(p) (p.53)p(x)=px(1−p)1−x, x∈{0,1}p(x)=p^x(1-p)^{1-x},\ x\in\{0,1\}ppp(1−p)p(1-p)
Binomial(n,p)(n,p) (p.55)(nx)px(1−p)n−x\binom{n}{x}p^x(1-p)^{n-x}npnpnp(1−p)np(1-p)
Poisson(λ)(\lambda) (p.57)e−λλxx!\dfrac{e^{-\lambda}\lambda^x}{x!}λ\lambdaλ\lambda
Normal(μ,σ2)(\mu,\sigma^2) (p.66)1σ2πexp⁡ ⁣[−(x−μ)22σ2]\dfrac{1}{\sigma\sqrt{2\pi}}\exp\!\Big[-\dfrac{(x-\mu)^2}{2\sigma^2}\Big]μ\muσ2\sigma^2
  • Poisson 过程 (p.59):P(N(t)=n)=(λt)ne−λtn!P(N(t)=n)=\dfrac{(\lambda t)^ne^{-\lambda t}}{n!},E[N(t)]=λtE[N(t)]=\lambda t。
  • 标准化 (p.66, 86):Z=X−μσ∼N(0,1)Z=\dfrac{X-\mu}{\sigma}\sim N(0,1),Φ(t)=P(Z<t)\Phi(t)=P(Z<t)。

条件概率与 Bayes 公式 (p.70–71)

P(A∣B)=P(AB)P(B),P(B∣A)=P(A∣B)P(B)P(A),P(A)=∑iP(A∣Bi)P(Bi)P(A\mid B)=\frac{P(AB)}{P(B)},\qquad P(B\mid A)=\frac{P(A\mid B)P(B)}{P(A)},\qquad P(A)=\sum_iP(A\mid B_i)P(B_i)

期望与方差 (p.76–84)

E(X)=∑xx p(x)  或  ∫−∞∞xf(x) dx,Var⁡(X)=E[(X−μ)2]=E(X2)−[E(X)]2E(X)=\sum_x x\,p(x)\ \ \text{或}\ \ \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}x f(x)\,dx,\qquad \operatorname{Var}(X)=E[(X-\mu)^2]=E(X^2)-[E(X)]^2 E(aX+b)=aE(X)+b,Var⁡(aX+b)=a2Var⁡(X),σaX+b=∣a∣σXE(aX+b)=aE(X)+b,\qquad \operatorname{Var}(aX+b)=a^2\operatorname{Var}(X),\qquad \sigma_{aX+b}=|a|\sigma_X

协方差与相关系数 (p.85)

Cov⁡(X,Y)=E[(X−μX)(Y−μY)],ρ=σXYσXσY∈[−1,1]\operatorname{Cov}(X,Y)=E[(X-\mu_X)(Y-\mu_Y)],\qquad \rho=\frac{\sigma_{XY}}{\sigma_X\sigma_Y}\in[-1,1] Var⁡(X±Y)=Var⁡(X)+Var⁡(Y)±2Cov⁡(X,Y)\operatorname{Var}(X\pm Y)=\operatorname{Var}(X)+\operatorname{Var}(Y)\pm2\operatorname{Cov}(X,Y)

独立 ⇒ Cov⁡=0\operatorname{Cov}=0,反过来不成立。

Lecture 02 · 预测建模基础

模型与误差分解 (p.17, 44)

Y=f(X)+ε,E[(Y−Y^)2]=[f(X)−f^(X)]2⏟reducible+Var⁡(ε)⏟irreducibleY=f(X)+\varepsilon,\qquad E\big[(Y-\hat Y)^2\big]=\underbrace{[f(X)-\hat f(X)]^2}_{\text{reducible}}+\underbrace{\operatorname{Var}(\varepsilon)}_{\text{irreducible}}

MSE 与偏差-方差分解 (p.34, 42–44)

MSE=1n∑i=1n(yi−f^(xi))2,E[(y0−f^(x0))2]=Var⁡(f^(x0))+[Bias⁡(f^(x0))]2+Var⁡(ε)MSE=\frac1n\sum_{i=1}^n\big(y_i-\hat f(x_i)\big)^2,\qquad E\big[(y_0-\hat f(x_0))^2\big]=\operatorname{Var}(\hat f(x_0))+[\operatorname{Bias}(\hat f(x_0))]^2+\operatorname{Var}(\varepsilon)

无偏估计量 (p.40–41)

  • 定义:E(Θ^)=θE(\hat\Theta)=\theta;偏差 Bias⁡=E(Θ^)−θ\operatorname{Bias}=E(\hat\Theta)-\theta。
  • 样本均值无偏:Xˉ=1n∑Xi\bar X=\dfrac1n\sum X_i,E(Xˉ)=μE(\bar X)=\mu,Var⁡(Xˉ)=σ2n\operatorname{Var}(\bar X)=\dfrac{\sigma^2}{n}。
  • 样本方差无偏(分母是 n−1n-1):
S2=1n−1∑i=1n(Xi−Xˉ)2,E(S2)=σ2S^2=\frac{1}{n-1}\sum_{i=1}^n(X_i-\bar X)^2,\qquad E(S^2)=\sigma^2

证明要点:E[∑(Xi−Xˉ)2]=∑E(Xi2)−nE(Xˉ2)=n(σ2+μ2)−n(σ2n+μ2)=(n−1)σ2E\big[\sum(X_i-\bar X)^2\big]=\sum E(X_i^2)-nE(\bar X^2)=n(\sigma^2+\mu^2)-n\big(\tfrac{\sigma^2}{n}+\mu^2\big)=(n-1)\sigma^2。

  • 在所有无偏估计量中方差最小的叫 minimum variance unbiased estimator (MVUE)。

分类误差、Bayes 分类器与 KNN (p.46–49)

Error rate=1n∑i=1nI(yi≠y^i),Bayes: y^0=arg⁡max⁡jPr⁡(Y=j∣X=x0)\text{Error rate}=\frac1n\sum_{i=1}^nI(y_i\ne\hat y_i),\qquad \text{Bayes: }\hat y_0=\arg\max_j\Pr(Y=j\mid X=x_0) Bayes error rate=1−E[max⁡jPr⁡(Y=j∣X)],KNN: Pr⁡(Y=j∣X=x0)=1K∑i∈N0I(yi=j)\text{Bayes error rate}=1-E\Big[\max_j\Pr(Y=j\mid X)\Big],\qquad \text{KNN: }\Pr(Y=j\mid X=x_0)=\frac1K\sum_{i\in N_0}I(y_i=j)

Lecture 03 · 简单线性回归

模型与最小二乘 (p.8–9)

Y=β0+β1x+ε,Sxx=∑(xi−xˉ)2=∑xi2−(∑xi)2n,Sxy=∑(xi−xˉ)(yi−yˉ)=∑xiyi−(∑xi)(∑yi)nY=\beta_0+\beta_1x+\varepsilon,\qquad S_{xx}=\sum(x_i-\bar x)^2=\sum x_i^2-\frac{(\sum x_i)^2}{n},\qquad S_{xy}=\sum(x_i-\bar x)(y_i-\bar y)=\sum x_iy_i-\frac{(\sum x_i)(\sum y_i)}{n} β^1=SxySxx,β^0=yˉ−β^1xˉ,ei=yi−y^i\hat\beta_1=\frac{S_{xy}}{S_{xx}},\qquad \hat\beta_0=\bar y-\hat\beta_1\bar x,\qquad e_i=y_i-\hat y_i

σ2\sigma^2 的无偏估计 (p.12)

SSE=∑i=1n(yi−y^i)2,σ^2=SSEn−2SS_E=\sum_{i=1}^n(y_i-\hat y_i)^2,\qquad \hat\sigma^2=\frac{SS_E}{n-2}

(分母 n−2n-2,因为估计了 β0,β1\beta_0,\beta_1 两个参数;多元回归推广为 n−pn-p。)

系数的期望、方差与标准误 (p.16)

E(β^1)=β1,V(β^1)=σ2Sxx,E(β^0)=β0,V(β^0)=σ2[1n+xˉ2Sxx]E(\hat\beta_1)=\beta_1,\quad V(\hat\beta_1)=\frac{\sigma^2}{S_{xx}},\qquad E(\hat\beta_0)=\beta_0,\quad V(\hat\beta_0)=\sigma^2\Big[\frac1n+\frac{\bar x^2}{S_{xx}}\Big] se(β^1)=σ^2Sxx,se(β^0)=σ^2[1n+xˉ2Sxx]se(\hat\beta_1)=\sqrt{\frac{\hat\sigma^2}{S_{xx}}},\qquad se(\hat\beta_0)=\sqrt{\hat\sigma^2\Big[\frac1n+\frac{\bar x^2}{S_{xx}}\Big]}

t 检验与置信区间 (p.13–20)

T=Xˉ−μS/n∼tn−1,Xˉ±tα/2,n−1SnT=\frac{\bar X-\mu}{S/\sqrt n}\sim t_{n-1},\qquad \bar X\pm t_{\alpha/2,n-1}\frac{S}{\sqrt n} T0=β^1−β1,0se(β^1)∼tn−2,β^1±tα/2,n−2σ^2Sxx,β^0±tα/2,n−2σ^2[1n+xˉ2Sxx]T_0=\frac{\hat\beta_1-\beta_{1,0}}{se(\hat\beta_1)}\sim t_{n-2},\qquad \hat\beta_1\pm t_{\alpha/2,n-2}\sqrt{\frac{\hat\sigma^2}{S_{xx}}},\qquad \hat\beta_0\pm t_{\alpha/2,n-2}\sqrt{\hat\sigma^2\Big[\frac1n+\frac{\bar x^2}{S_{xx}}\Big]}

预测区间 (p.23–24)

y^0±tα/2,n−2σ^2[1+1n+(x0−xˉ)2Sxx]\hat y_0\pm t_{\alpha/2,n-2}\sqrt{\hat\sigma^2\Big[1+\frac1n+\frac{(x_0-\bar x)^2}{S_{xx}}\Big]}

预测区间永远比均值置信区间宽,多出的“1”来自新观测本身的误差。

ANOVA (p.25)

SST=∑(yi−yˉ)2=SSR+SSE,SSR=∑(y^i−yˉ)2SS_T=\sum(y_i-\bar y)^2=SS_R+SS_E,\qquad SS_R=\sum(\hat y_i-\bar y)^2

相关系数与回归 (p.29)

ρ=σXYσXσY,β1=ρσYσX,β0=μY−μXρσYσX\rho=\frac{\sigma_{XY}}{\sigma_X\sigma_Y},\qquad \beta_1=\rho\frac{\sigma_Y}{\sigma_X},\qquad \beta_0=\mu_Y-\mu_X\rho\frac{\sigma_Y}{\sigma_X}

最大似然 (p.35–38)

L(θ)=∏i=1nf(xi∣θ),l(β0,β1,σ2)=−n2ln⁡2π−n2ln⁡σ2−12σ2∑(yi−β0−β1xi)2L(\theta)=\prod_{i=1}^nf(x_i\mid\theta),\qquad l(\beta_0,\beta_1,\sigma^2)=-\frac n2\ln2\pi-\frac n2\ln\sigma^2-\frac{1}{2\sigma^2}\sum(y_i-\beta_0-\beta_1x_i)^2

对 β0,β1\beta_0,\beta_1 求导等于 0 得到与最小二乘相同的估计;σ2\sigma^2 的 MLE 是 SSEn\dfrac{SS_E}{n}(有偏),所以用 SSEn−2\dfrac{SS_E}{n-2}。

Lecture 04 · 多元线性回归

模型与矩阵形式 (p.6, 14–15)

yi=β0+∑j=1kβjxij+εi,y=Xβ+ε,β^=(X′X)−1X′y,y^=Xβ^y_i=\beta_0+\sum_{j=1}^k\beta_jx_{ij}+\varepsilon_i,\qquad \mathbf y=X\boldsymbol\beta+\boldsymbol\varepsilon,\qquad \hat{\boldsymbol\beta}=(X'X)^{-1}X'\mathbf y,\qquad \hat{\mathbf y}=X\hat{\boldsymbol\beta}

σ2\sigma^2 的无偏估计 (p.16):p=k+1p=k+1 个参数

σ^2=∑ei2n−p=SSEn−p=MSE\hat\sigma^2=\frac{\sum e_i^2}{n-p}=\frac{SS_E}{n-p}=MS_E

系数的性质 (p.28–29)

E(β^)=β,Cov⁡(β^)=σ2(X′X)−1=σ2C,Var⁡(β^j)=σ2Cjj,Cov⁡(β^i,β^j)=σ2CijE(\hat{\boldsymbol\beta})=\boldsymbol\beta,\qquad \operatorname{Cov}(\hat{\boldsymbol\beta})=\sigma^2(X'X)^{-1}=\sigma^2C,\qquad \operatorname{Var}(\hat\beta_j)=\sigma^2C_{jj},\qquad \operatorname{Cov}(\hat\beta_i,\hat\beta_j)=\sigma^2C_{ij}

整体 F 检验 (p.25)

来源SSdfMSF0F_0
RegressionSSRSS_RkkMSR=SSR/kMS_R=SS_R/kMSR/MSEMS_R/MS_E
ErrorSSESS_En−pn-pMSE=SSE/(n−p)MS_E=SS_E/(n-p)
TotalSSTSS_Tn−1n-1

H0:β1=⋯=βk=0H_0:\beta_1=\dots=\beta_k=0,F0>fα,k,n−pF_0>f_{\alpha,k,n-p} 时拒绝。

单个系数 t 检验与 CI (p.30, 33)

T0=β^j−βj0σ^2Cjj  (拒绝若 ∣T0∣>tα/2,n−p),β^j±tα/2,n−pσ^2CjjT_0=\frac{\hat\beta_j-\beta_{j0}}{\sqrt{\hat\sigma^2C_{jj}}}\ \ (\text{拒绝若 }|T_0|>t_{\alpha/2,n-p}),\qquad \hat\beta_j\pm t_{\alpha/2,n-p}\sqrt{\hat\sigma^2C_{jj}}

均值响应 CI 与预测区间 (p.35, 38)

μ^Y∣x0=x0′β^,μ^Y∣x0±tα/2,n−pσ^2 x0′(X′X)−1x0\hat\mu_{Y|x_0}=\mathbf x_0'\hat{\boldsymbol\beta},\qquad \hat\mu_{Y|x_0}\pm t_{\alpha/2,n-p}\sqrt{\hat\sigma^2\,\mathbf x_0'(X'X)^{-1}\mathbf x_0} y^0±tα/2,n−pσ^2(1+x0′(X′X)−1x0)\hat y_0\pm t_{\alpha/2,n-p}\sqrt{\hat\sigma^2\big(1+\mathbf x_0'(X'X)^{-1}\mathbf x_0\big)}

R2R^2、Adjusted R2R^2 与标准化残差 (p.41, 43)

R2=SSRSST=1−SSESST,Radj2=1−SSE/(n−p)SST/(n−1),di=eiMSER^2=\frac{SS_R}{SS_T}=1-\frac{SS_E}{SS_T},\qquad R^2_{adj}=1-\frac{SS_E/(n-p)}{SS_T/(n-1)},\qquad d_i=\frac{e_i}{\sqrt{MS_E}}

交互项、多项式与虚拟变量 (p.47–64)

Y=β0+β1x1+β2x2+β12x1x2+β11x12+β22x22+εY=\beta_0+\beta_1x_1+\beta_2x_2+\beta_{12}x_1x_2+\beta_{11}x_1^2+\beta_{22}x_2^2+\varepsilon

对参数线性就是线性回归。mm 个水平的分类变量用 m−1m-1 个 0/1 虚拟变量,剩下的那个水平是 baseline。

Extra sum of squares / Partial F (p.66–68)

SSR(β)=β^′X′y−(∑yi)2n,MSE=y′y−β^′X′yn−pSS_R(\boldsymbol\beta)=\hat{\boldsymbol\beta}'X'\mathbf y-\frac{(\sum y_i)^2}{n},\qquad MS_E=\frac{\mathbf y'\mathbf y-\hat{\boldsymbol\beta}'X'\mathbf y}{n-p} F0=SSR(β1∣β2)/rMSE,SSR(β1∣β2)=SSR(β)−SSR(β2),拒绝若 F0>fα,r,n−pF_0=\frac{SS_R(\boldsymbol\beta_1\mid\boldsymbol\beta_2)/r}{MS_E},\qquad SS_R(\boldsymbol\beta_1\mid\boldsymbol\beta_2)=SS_R(\boldsymbol\beta)-SS_R(\boldsymbol\beta_2),\qquad \text{拒绝若 }F_0>f_{\alpha,r,n-p}

模型选择指标 (p.73–75)

AIC=−2ln⁡L+2p=nln⁡(MSE)+2p+C,BIC=−2ln⁡L+pln⁡n=nln⁡(MSE)+pln⁡n+CAIC=-2\ln L+2p=n\ln(MSE)+2p+C,\qquad BIC=-2\ln L+p\ln n=n\ln(MSE)+p\ln n+C Cp=SSE(p)σ^full2−n+2p (选 Cp≈p),PRESS=∑i=1n(yi−y^(i))2=∑i=1n(ei1−hii)2C_p=\frac{SS_E(p)}{\hat\sigma^2_{full}}-n+2p\ (\text{选 }C_p\approx p),\qquad PRESS=\sum_{i=1}^n\big(y_i-\hat y_{(i)}\big)^2=\sum_{i=1}^n\Big(\frac{e_i}{1-h_{ii}}\Big)^2

AIC、BIC、PRESS 越小越好;BIC 惩罚更重,偏好更简单的模型。变量选择方法:all possible regressions、forward、backward、stepwise (p.76–84)。

多重共线性 (p.86–87)

VIF(βj)=11−Rj2VIF(\beta_j)=\frac{1}{1-R_j^2}

Rj2R_j^2 是用其他自变量回归 xjx_j 的 R2R^2。VIF>10VIF>10(也有说 >4>4 或 55)说明共线性严重。整体 F 显著但单个 t 都不显著,也是共线性的信号。

Lecture 05 · Logistic 回归

模型与 odds (p.4–5)

log⁡pi1−pi=β0+β1xi1+⋯+βpxip,pi=eβ0+β1xi1+⋯+βpxip1+eβ0+β1xi1+⋯+βpxip\log\frac{p_i}{1-p_i}=\beta_0+\beta_1x_{i1}+\dots+\beta_px_{ip},\qquad p_i=\frac{e^{\beta_0+\beta_1x_{i1}+\dots+\beta_px_{ip}}}{1+e^{\beta_0+\beta_1x_{i1}+\dots+\beta_px_{ip}}}

p/(1−p)p/(1-p) 是 odds,取值 (0,∞)(0,\infty);βj\beta_j 是 xjx_j 加 1 时 log-odds 的变化量。

最大似然估计 (p.6–7)

L(β)=∏i=1npiYi(1−pi)1−Yi,l(β)=∑i=1n[Yi∑j=0pβjxij−log⁡(1+e∑jβjxij)]L(\boldsymbol\beta)=\prod_{i=1}^np_i^{Y_i}(1-p_i)^{1-Y_i},\qquad l(\boldsymbol\beta)=\sum_{i=1}^n\Big[Y_i\sum_{j=0}^p\beta_jx_{ij}-\log\big(1+e^{\sum_j\beta_jx_{ij}}\big)\Big] ∂l∂βm=∑i=1nxim(Yi−pi)=0,Newton-Raphson: β^n+1=β^n−l′(β^n)l′′(β^n)\frac{\partial l}{\partial\beta_m}=\sum_{i=1}^nx_{im}\big(Y_i-p_i\big)=0,\qquad \text{Newton-Raphson: }\hat\beta_{n+1}=\hat\beta_n-\frac{l'(\hat\beta_n)}{l''(\hat\beta_n)}

似然比检验 (p.9)

D=−2log⁡Λ=−2log⁡L(β^0,…,β^p−1,0)L(β^0,…,β^p) ∼ χ12(拒绝 H0:βp=0 若 D>χ12(α))D=-2\log\Lambda=-2\log\frac{L(\hat\beta_0,\dots,\hat\beta_{p-1},0)}{L(\hat\beta_0,\dots,\hat\beta_p)}\ \sim\ \chi^2_1\quad(\text{拒绝 }H_0:\beta_p=0\text{ 若 }D>\chi^2_1(\alpha))

Binomial logistic 回归(分组数据,p.15–16)

Pr⁡(yi)=(niyi)piyi(1−pi)ni−yi,l(β)=∑i=1N[yi∑jβjxij−nilog⁡(1+e∑jβjxij)]\Pr(y_i)=\binom{n_i}{y_i}p_i^{y_i}(1-p_i)^{n_i-y_i},\qquad l(\boldsymbol\beta)=\sum_{i=1}^N\Big[y_i\sum_j\beta_jx_{ij}-n_i\log\big(1+e^{\sum_j\beta_jx_{ij}}\big)\Big]

Multinomial logistic 回归 (p.19–20):以第 KK 类为 baseline

Pr⁡(Y=k∣x)=eβk0+βk1x1+⋯+βkpxp1+∑l=1K−1eβl0+βl1x1+⋯+βlpxp,Pr⁡(Y=K∣x)=11+∑l=1K−1eβl0+⋯+βlpxp\Pr(Y=k\mid x)=\frac{e^{\beta_{k0}+\beta_{k1}x_1+\dots+\beta_{kp}x_p}}{1+\sum_{l=1}^{K-1}e^{\beta_{l0}+\beta_{l1}x_1+\dots+\beta_{lp}x_p}},\qquad \Pr(Y=K\mid x)=\frac{1}{1+\sum_{l=1}^{K-1}e^{\beta_{l0}+\dots+\beta_{lp}x_p}} log⁡Pr⁡(Y=k∣x)Pr⁡(Y=K∣x)=βk0+βk1x1+⋯+βkpxp,Softmax: Pr⁡(Y=k∣x)=eβk0+⋯+βkpxp∑l=1Keβl0+⋯+βlpxp\log\frac{\Pr(Y=k\mid x)}{\Pr(Y=K\mid x)}=\beta_{k0}+\beta_{k1}x_1+\dots+\beta_{kp}x_p,\qquad \text{Softmax: }\Pr(Y=k\mid x)=\frac{e^{\beta_{k0}+\dots+\beta_{kp}x_p}}{\sum_{l=1}^Ke^{\beta_{l0}+\dots+\beta_{lp}x_p}}

Lecture 06 · 判别分析、Naive Bayes、Poisson 回归与 KNN

Bayes 定理用于分类 (p.5)

Pr⁡(Y=k∣X=x)=πkfk(x)∑l=1Kπlfl(x),πk=Pr⁡(Y=k),fk(x)=Pr⁡(X=x∣Y=k)\Pr(Y=k\mid X=x)=\frac{\pi_kf_k(x)}{\sum_{l=1}^K\pi_lf_l(x)},\qquad \pi_k=\Pr(Y=k),\quad f_k(x)=\Pr(X=x\mid Y=k)

LDA,p=1p=1 (p.9–12):各类方差相同

δk(x)=x⋅μkσ2−μk22σ2+log⁡πk,K=2, π1=π2⇒x=μ1+μ22\delta_k(x)=x\cdot\frac{\mu_k}{\sigma^2}-\frac{\mu_k^2}{2\sigma^2}+\log\pi_k,\qquad K=2,\ \pi_1=\pi_2\Rightarrow x=\frac{\mu_1+\mu_2}{2} π^k=nkn,μ^k=1nk∑i:yi=kxi,σ^2=1n−K∑k=1K∑i:yi=k(xi−μ^k)2\hat\pi_k=\frac{n_k}{n},\qquad \hat\mu_k=\frac{1}{n_k}\sum_{i:y_i=k}x_i,\qquad \hat\sigma^2=\frac{1}{n-K}\sum_{k=1}^K\sum_{i:y_i=k}(x_i-\hat\mu_k)^2

LDA,p>1p>1 (p.13–16):X∼N(μk,Σ)X\sim N(\boldsymbol\mu_k,\boldsymbol\Sigma),共同协方差矩阵

f(x)=1(2π)p/2∣Σ∣1/2exp⁡(−12(x−μ)TΣ−1(x−μ)),δk(x)=xTΣ−1μk−12μkTΣ−1μk+log⁡πkf(x)=\frac{1}{(2\pi)^{p/2}|\boldsymbol\Sigma|^{1/2}}\exp\Big(-\tfrac12(x-\boldsymbol\mu)^T\boldsymbol\Sigma^{-1}(x-\boldsymbol\mu)\Big),\qquad \delta_k(x)=x^T\boldsymbol\Sigma^{-1}\boldsymbol\mu_k-\tfrac12\boldsymbol\mu_k^T\boldsymbol\Sigma^{-1}\boldsymbol\mu_k+\log\pi_k Pr⁡^(Y=k∣X=x)=eδ^k(x)∑l=1Keδ^l(x)\widehat{\Pr}(Y=k\mid X=x)=\frac{e^{\hat\delta_k(x)}}{\sum_{l=1}^Ke^{\hat\delta_l(x)}}

QDA (p.24):每类有自己的 Σk\boldsymbol\Sigma_k

δk(x)=−12(x−μk)TΣk−1(x−μk)−12log⁡∣Σk∣+log⁡πk\delta_k(x)=-\tfrac12(x-\boldsymbol\mu_k)^T\boldsymbol\Sigma_k^{-1}(x-\boldsymbol\mu_k)-\tfrac12\log|\boldsymbol\Sigma_k|+\log\pi_k

混淆矩阵 (p.17–20)

指标定义别名
False positive rateFP/NFP/NType I error,1−1-specificity
True positive rateTP/PTP/Psensitivity,recall,power
Positive predictive valueTP/P^TP/\hat Pprecision
Negative predictive valueTN/N^TN/\hat N
Error rate(FP+FN)/n(FP+FN)/n

Naive Bayes (p.28–30):类内各变量独立

fk(x)=fk1(x1)fk2(x2)⋯fkp(xp),Pr⁡(Y=k∣x)=πk∏jfkj(xj)∑lπl∏jflj(xj)f_k(x)=f_{k1}(x_1)f_{k2}(x_2)\cdots f_{kp}(x_p),\qquad \Pr(Y=k\mid x)=\frac{\pi_k\prod_jf_{kj}(x_j)}{\sum_l\pi_l\prod_jf_{lj}(x_j)}

Gaussian Naive Bayes:δk(x)∝−12∑j=1p[(xj−μkj)2σkj2+log⁡σkj2]+log⁡πk\delta_k(x)\propto-\dfrac12\sum_{j=1}^p\Big[\dfrac{(x_j-\mu_{kj})^2}{\sigma_{kj}^2}+\log\sigma_{kj}^2\Big]+\log\pi_k

Poisson 回归 (p.36–37)

Pr⁡(Y=k)=e−λλkk!,log⁡λ=β0+β1X1+⋯+βpXp,l(β)=∑i=1n(Yilog⁡λi−λi−log⁡Yi!)\Pr(Y=k)=\frac{e^{-\lambda}\lambda^k}{k!},\qquad \log\lambda=\beta_0+\beta_1X_1+\dots+\beta_pX_p,\qquad l(\boldsymbol\beta)=\sum_{i=1}^n\big(Y_i\log\lambda_i-\lambda_i-\log Y_i!\big)

广义线性模型 GLM (p.40–41)

模型YY 的分布链接函数 η(μ)\eta(\mu)
LinearNormalμ\mu
LogisticBernoullilog⁡μ1−μ\log\dfrac{\mu}{1-\mu}
PoissonPoissonlog⁡μ\log\mu

Logistic vs. LDA (p.44):两类时 LDA 也有 log⁡p1(x)1−p1(x)=c0+c1x1+⋯+cpxp\log\dfrac{p_1(x)}{1-p_1(x)}=c_0+c_1x_1+\dots+c_px_p 的形式;区别在估计方法(logistic 用条件似然,LDA 用联合似然)。

KNN 距离 (p.47, 50)

Euclidean: ∑(xi−yi)2,Manhattan: ∑∣xi−yi∣,Minkowski: (∑∣xi−yi∣q)1/q,Hamming: ∑I(xi≠yi)\text{Euclidean: }\sqrt{\sum(x_i-y_i)^2},\qquad \text{Manhattan: }\sum|x_i-y_i|,\qquad \text{Minkowski: }\Big(\sum|x_i-y_i|^q\Big)^{1/q},\qquad \text{Hamming: }\sum I(x_i\ne y_i)

变量量纲不同时先标准化(例如 min-max:x−min⁡max⁡−min⁡\dfrac{x-\min}{\max-\min})再算距离。

1. Bias-Variance 与模型灵活度

核心公式

E[(y0−f^(x0))2]=Var⁡(f^(x0))+[Bias⁡(f^(x0))]2+Var⁡(ε)E\big[(y_0-\hat f(x_0))^2\big]=\operatorname{Var}(\hat f(x_0))+\big[\operatorname{Bias}(\hat f(x_0))\big]^2+\operatorname{Var}(\varepsilon)
  • 模型越灵活:bias 下降,variance 上升;training error 一直下降,test error 呈 U 形。
  • Var⁡(ε)\operatorname{Var}(\varepsilon) 是 irreducible error,任何模型都去不掉,是 test error 的下限。
  • 嵌套模型(例如 linear ⊂ cubic):更大的模型 training RSS 一定不会更高,但 test RSS 不一定。

Exam Q4 Linear vs. Cubic 回归

有 n=100n=100 个观测,一个预测变量。分别拟合线性回归和三次回归 Y=β0+β1X+β2X2+β3X3+εY=\beta_0+\beta_1X+\beta_2X^2+\beta_3X^3+\varepsilon。

(a) 如果真实关系是线性的 Y=β0+β1X+εY=\beta_0+\beta_1X+\varepsilon,比较两者的 training RSS;test RSS 呢? (b) 如果真实关系不是线性的,但不知道离线性有多远,比较 training RSS 和 test RSS。

查看答案

(a) Training RSS:cubic 更低(至少不会更高)。三次模型包含线性模型,最小二乘时多出来的项会去拟合噪声。 Test RSS:linear 更低。真实关系是线性的,三次项只增加 variance(过拟合),bias 不会再下降。

(b) Training RSS:cubic 更低,理由同上,与真实关系无关。 Test RSS:信息不足,无法确定。如果真实关系离线性很远,cubic 降低的 bias 多于增加的 variance,test RSS 更低;如果只是轻微非线性,linear 可能更好。

HW1 Q1 灵活模型 vs. 不灵活模型

判断下面每种情况,灵活(flexible)方法通常表现更好还是更差: (a) nn 极大、pp 很小;(b) pp 极大、nn 很小;(c) 预测变量与响应高度非线性;(d) 误差方差 σ2=Var⁡(ε)\sigma^2=\operatorname{Var}(\varepsilon) 极大。

查看答案
  • (a) 更好:样本多,灵活模型的 variance 被压低,可以用更低的 bias 换取更好的拟合。
  • (b) 更差:样本少、变量多,灵活模型极易过拟合,variance 很大。
  • (c) 更好:不灵活(线性)模型 bias 很大,灵活模型能捕捉非线性。
  • (d) 更差:噪声很大时,灵活模型会去拟合噪声,variance 上升;简单模型更稳。

HW1 Q2 五条曲线与偏差-方差分解

(a) 画出随灵活度增加时的 squared bias、variance、training error、test error、irreducible error 五条曲线;(b) 解释形状;(c) 证明 E[f(x0)−f^(x0)]2=Var⁡(f^(x0))+[Bias⁡(f^(x0))]2E[f(x_0)-\hat f(x_0)]^2=\operatorname{Var}(\hat f(x_0))+[\operatorname{Bias}(\hat f(x_0))]^2。

查看答案

(a)(b)

  • Squared bias:单调下降。模型越灵活,越能逼近真实 ff。
  • Variance:单调上升。越灵活,换一份训练集拟合结果变化越大。
  • Training error:单调下降。灵活模型能越来越贴合训练点。
  • Test error:U 形。先因 bias 下降而下降,后因 variance 上升而上升。
  • Irreducible error:水平线 Var⁡(ε)\operatorname{Var}(\varepsilon),test error 永远在它之上。
五条曲线示意图
五条曲线示意图:test error = squared bias + variance + irreducible error,在竖虚线处最小。
课件中三个例子的 bias、variance 与 test MSE
课件里的三个例子:红线 test MSE,蓝线 squared bias,橙线 variance,水平虚线 Var(ε)。(Lecture 02 p.45)

(c) 记 fˉ=E[f^(x0)]\bar f=E[\hat f(x_0)],加一项减一项:

E[f−f^]2=E[(f−fˉ)+(fˉ−f^)]2=(f−fˉ)2+2(f−fˉ) E[fˉ−f^]+E[fˉ−f^]2E[f-\hat f]^2=E[(f-\bar f)+(\bar f-\hat f)]^2=(f-\bar f)^2+2(f-\bar f)\,E[\bar f-\hat f]+E[\bar f-\hat f]^2

因为 ff 与 fˉ\bar f 都是常数,且 E[fˉ−f^]=0E[\bar f-\hat f]=0,交叉项为 0,所以

E[f−f^]2=[Bias⁡(f^)]2+Var⁡(f^)E[f-\hat f]^2=[\operatorname{Bias}(\hat f)]^2+\operatorname{Var}(\hat f)

课件对应:Lecture 02 p.42–45(The Bias-Variance Trade-Off),p.38–39(Overfitting 的两个例子)。

2. 线性回归的矩阵形式与系数推断

核心公式

y=Xβ+ε,β^=(X′X)−1X′y\mathbf y=X\boldsymbol\beta+\boldsymbol\varepsilon,\qquad \hat{\boldsymbol\beta}=(X'X)^{-1}X'\mathbf y Cov⁡(β^)=σ2(X′X)−1=σ2C,Var⁡(β^j)=σ2Cjj,se(β^j)=σ^2Cjj\operatorname{Cov}(\hat{\boldsymbol\beta})=\sigma^2(X'X)^{-1}=\sigma^2C,\qquad \operatorname{Var}(\hat\beta_j)=\sigma^2C_{jj},\qquad se(\hat\beta_j)=\sqrt{\hat\sigma^2C_{jj}}
  • 注意 XX 的 第一列全是 1(对应截距),所以 (X′X)−1(X'X)^{-1} 是 (k+1)×(k+1)(k+1)\times(k+1)。
  • 单个系数的 t 检验:t0=β^j/se(β^j)t_0=\hat\beta_j/se(\hat\beta_j),自由度 n−pn-p(p=k+1p=k+1)。

Exam Q1 由 (X′X)−1(X'X)^{-1} 读出方差和标准误

(X′X)−1=[0.893758−0.028245−0.0175641−0.0282450.00133290.0001547−0.01756410.00015470.0009108](X'X)^{-1}=\begin{bmatrix}0.893758&-0.028245&-0.0175641\\-0.028245&0.0013329&0.0001547\\-0.0175641&0.0001547&0.0009108\end{bmatrix}

(a) 回归模型中有几个变量?(b) 如果 σ^2=50\hat\sigma^2=50,每个回归系数方差的估计是多少?(c) 截距的标准误是多少?

查看答案

(a) 矩阵是 3×33\times3,对应 β0,β1,β2\beta_0,\beta_1,\beta_2,所以有 2 个预测变量(外加截距)。

(b) Var⁡(β^j)=σ^2Cjj\operatorname{Var}(\hat\beta_j)=\hat\sigma^2C_{jj},取对角线:

Var⁡(β^0)=50(0.893758)=44.69,Var⁡(β^1)=50(0.0013329)=0.0666,Var⁡(β^2)=50(0.0009108)=0.0455\operatorname{Var}(\hat\beta_0)=50(0.893758)=44.69,\quad \operatorname{Var}(\hat\beta_1)=50(0.0013329)=0.0666,\quad \operatorname{Var}(\hat\beta_2)=50(0.0009108)=0.0455

(c) se(β^0)=44.69=6.685se(\hat\beta_0)=\sqrt{44.69}=6.685。

易错点:非对角线元素是 协方差 Cov⁡(β^i,β^j)=σ2Cij\operatorname{Cov}(\hat\beta_i,\hat\beta_j)=\sigma^2C_{ij},不是方差。

Lecture 04 p.17–19, 31 Wire bond 拉力数据(矩阵法)

n=25n=25,x1x_1 = wire length,x2x_2 = die height,yy = pull strength。

展开原始数据(25 个观测)
Obsx1x_1 wire lengthx2x_2 die heightyy pull strength
12509.95
2811024.45
31112031.75
41055035.00
5829525.02
6420016.86
7237514.38
82529.60
9910024.35
10830027.50
11441217.08
121140037.00
131250041.95
14236011.66
15420521.65
16440017.89
172060069.00
18158510.30
191054034.93
201525046.59
211529044.88
221651054.12
231759056.63
24610022.13
25540021.15

由数据得

X′X=[2520682942062396771778294771773531848],X′y=[725.828008.47274811.31]X'X=\begin{bmatrix}25&206&8294\\206&2396&77177\\8294&77177&3531848\end{bmatrix},\quad X'\mathbf y=\begin{bmatrix}725.82\\8008.47\\274811.31\end{bmatrix}

求回归方程;并在 σ^2=MSE=5.2352\hat\sigma^2=MS_E=5.2352、C22=0.0000015C_{22}=0.0000015 时检验 H0:β2=0H_0:\beta_2=0(α=0.05\alpha=0.05)。

查看答案 β^=(X′X)−1X′y=[0.214653−0.007491−0.000340−0.0074910.001671−0.000019−0.000340−0.0000190.0000015][725.828008.47274811.31]=[2.263792.744270.01253]\hat{\boldsymbol\beta}=(X'X)^{-1}X'\mathbf y=\begin{bmatrix}0.214653&-0.007491&-0.000340\\-0.007491&0.001671&-0.000019\\-0.000340&-0.000019&0.0000015\end{bmatrix}\begin{bmatrix}725.82\\8008.47\\274811.31\end{bmatrix}=\begin{bmatrix}2.26379\\2.74427\\0.01253\end{bmatrix} y^=2.26379+2.74427x1+0.01253x2\hat y=2.26379+2.74427x_1+0.01253x_2 t0=β^2σ^2C22=0.012535.2352×0.0000015=4.477>t0.025,22=2.074t_0=\frac{\hat\beta_2}{\sqrt{\hat\sigma^2C_{22}}}=\frac{0.01253}{\sqrt{5.2352\times0.0000015}}=4.477>t_{0.025,22}=2.074

拒绝 H0H_0,die height 对模型有显著贡献(P 值约 0.0002)。

HW2 Q2 (a)(b) 轴承磨损数据

yy = wear,x1x_1 = oil viscosity,x2x_2 = load,6 个观测(bearingdata.csv):

Obsyy (wear)x1x_1 (viscosity)x2x_2 (load)
12931.6851
223015.5816
317222.01058
49143.01201
511333.01357
612540.01115

(a) 拟合 y=β0+β1x1+β2x2+εy=\beta_0+\beta_1x_1+\beta_2x_2+\varepsilon;(b) 估计 σ2\sigma^2,计算每个系数的 t 统计量(α=0.05\alpha=0.05)。

查看答案

(a) y^=383.80−3.638 x1−0.1117 x2\hat y=383.80-3.638\,x_1-0.1117\,x_2

(b) SSE=457.86SSE=457.86,σ^2=MSE=SSE/(n−p)=457.86/3=152.62\hat\sigma^2=MSE=SSE/(n-p)=457.86/3=152.62。

系数估计t结论(t0.025,3=3.182t_{0.025,3}=3.182)
β0\beta_0383.8010.60显著
β1\beta_1(viscosity)−3.638−6.42显著
β2\beta_2(load)−0.1117−2.57不显著

3. ANOVA、R²、F 检验与 Extra Sum of Squares

核心公式(nn 个观测,kk 个预测变量,p=k+1p=k+1)

SST=SSR+SSE,R2=SSRSST,Radj2=1−SSE/(n−p)SST/(n−1)SST=SSR+SSE,\qquad R^2=\frac{SSR}{SST},\qquad R^2_{adj}=1-\frac{SSE/(n-p)}{SST/(n-1)} F0=SSR/kSSE/(n−p)=MSRMSE∼Fk, n−p,拒绝 H0:β1=⋯=βk=0 若 F0>Fα,k,n−pF_0=\frac{SSR/k}{SSE/(n-p)}=\frac{MSR}{MSE}\sim F_{k,\,n-p},\qquad \text{拒绝 }H_0:\beta_1=\dots=\beta_k=0\text{ 若 }F_0>F_{\alpha,k,n-p}

Partial F(extra sum of squares):在已有模型上增加 rr 个变量

F0=[SSR(full)−SSR(reduced)]/rMSE(full)∼Fr, n−pfullF_0=\frac{\big[SSR(\text{full})-SSR(\text{reduced})\big]/r}{MSE(\text{full})}\sim F_{r,\,n-p_{full}}

分母一定用 完整模型(full model) 的 MSE。

Exam Q2 由平方和做整体检验和偏 F 检验

模型有 2 个回归变量,20 个观测,SST=1000SST=1000,SSR=750SSR=750。 (a) R2R^2?(b) Adjusted R2R^2?(c) 计算 F 统计量检验回归显著性,α=0.05\alpha=0.05 和 α=0.01\alpha=0.01 时结论分别是什么?(d) 再加入第三个回归变量后 SSR=785SSR=785,加入这个变量是否改进了模型?

查看答案

n=20n=20,k=2k=2,p=3p=3,SSE=SST−SSR=250SSE=SST-SSR=250。

(a) R2=750/1000=0.75R^2=750/1000=0.75

(b) Radj2=1−250/171000/19=1−14.7152.63=0.721R^2_{adj}=1-\dfrac{250/17}{1000/19}=1-\dfrac{14.71}{52.63}=0.721

(c)

F0=750/2250/17=37514.71=25.5F_0=\frac{750/2}{250/17}=\frac{375}{14.71}=25.5

F0.05,2,17=3.59F_{0.05,2,17}=3.59,F0.01,2,17=6.11F_{0.01,2,17}=6.11。两种 α\alpha 下都有 F0>FF_0>F,拒绝 H0:β1=β2=0H_0:\beta_1=\beta_2=0,回归显著。

(d) 新模型 k=3k=3,p=4p=4:SSRfull=785SSR_{full}=785,SSEfull=1000−785=215SSE_{full}=1000-785=215,MSEfull=215/16=13.44MSE_{full}=215/16=13.44。

F0=(785−750)/1215/16=3513.44=2.60<F0.05,1,16=4.49F_0=\frac{(785-750)/1}{215/16}=\frac{35}{13.44}=2.60<F_{0.05,1,16}=4.49

不能拒绝 H0:β3=0H_0:\beta_3=0,加入第三个变量没有显著改进模型。(虽然 R2R^2 从 0.75 升到 0.785,但 R2R^2 加变量一定不会下降,不能据此判断。)

Lecture 04 p.26–27 Wire bond 的 ANOVA 表

查看答案
来源SSdfMSf0f_0
Regression5990.771222995.3856572.17
Error115.1735225.2352
Total6105.944724

f0=572.17>f0.05,2,22=3.44f_0=572.17>f_{0.05,2,22}=3.44(P 值 1.08×10−191.08\times10^{-19}),拒绝 H0H_0:拉力与 wire length 或 die height(或两者)线性相关。

Lecture 04 p.69–71 加入 x3,x4x_3,x_4 的 Partial F 检验

Wire bond 数据,已有 x1,x2x_1,x_2 时 SSR(β2,β1∣β0)=5990.8SSR(\beta_2,\beta_1|\beta_0)=5990.8;加入 x3,x4x_3,x_4 后 SSR(β4,β3,β2,β1∣β0)=6024.0SSR(\beta_4,\beta_3,\beta_2,\beta_1|\beta_0)=6024.0,完整模型 MSE=4.1MSE=4.1,n=25n=25。检验 x3,x4x_3,x_4 是否有贡献。

查看答案 SSR(β4,β3∣β2,β1,β0)=6024.0−5990.8=33.2(2 个自由度)SSR(\beta_4,\beta_3|\beta_2,\beta_1,\beta_0)=6024.0-5990.8=33.2\quad(2\text{ 个自由度}) f0=33.2/24.1=4.05>f0.05,2,20=3.49f_0=\frac{33.2/2}{4.1}=4.05>f_{0.05,2,20}=3.49

拒绝 H0H_0,x3,x4x_3,x_4 中 至少一个 有显著贡献。分母自由度 n−p=25−5=20n-p=25-5=20。

HW2 Q1 补全回归输出表

考虑下面的计算机输出:

The regression equation is Y = 254 + 2.77 x1 − 3.58 x2

PredictorCoefSE CoefT
Constant253.8104.781?
x12.77380.184615.02
x2−3.57530.1526?

S = 5.05756  R-Sq = ?  R-Sq (adj) = 98.4%

Analysis of Variance

SourceDFSSMSF
Regression22278411392?
Residual error???
Total1423091

(a) 补全缺失值;(b) 回归显著性的结论;(c) 各回归变量的贡献。

查看答案

(a) n=15n=15

  • Tconst=253.810/4.781=53.09T_{const}=253.810/4.781=53.09,Tx2=−3.5753/0.1526=−23.43T_{x_2}=-3.5753/0.1526=-23.43
  • Residual DF =14−2=12=14-2=12,SSE=23091−22784=307SSE=23091-22784=307,MSE=307/12=25.58MSE=307/12=25.58(核对:S2=5.057562=25.58S^2=5.05756^2=25.58 ✓)
  • F=11392/25.58=445.3F=11392/25.58=445.3
  • R2=22784/23091=98.7%R^2=22784/23091=98.7\%

补全后的输出表:

PredictorCoefSE CoefT
Constant253.8104.78153.09
x12.77380.184615.02
x2−3.57530.1526−23.43
SourceDFSSMSF
Regression22278411392445.3
Residual error1230725.58
Total1423091

R-Sq = 98.7%

(b) F=445.3≫F0.05,2,12=3.89F=445.3\gg F_{0.05,2,12}=3.89,回归非常显著。

(c) ∣t∣|t| 都远大于 t0.025,12=2.179t_{0.025,12}=2.179,x1x_1 与 x2x_2 都显著。

HW2 Q2 (c)(e)(g) 轴承数据的整体检验与偏 F 检验

查看答案

(c) SST=30245.3SST=30245.3,SSR=29787.5SSR=29787.5,F0=29787.5/2152.62=97.59>F0.05,2,3=9.55F_0=\dfrac{29787.5/2}{152.62}=97.59>F_{0.05,2,3}=9.55,P 值 = 0.0019,回归显著。

(d) x1=25, x2=1000x_1=25,\ x_2=1000:y^=383.80−3.638(25)−0.1117(1000)=181.2\hat y=383.80-3.638(25)-0.1117(1000)=181.2

(e) 只有 x1x_1 时 SSE=1469.5SSE=1469.5。

F0=1469.5−457.9152.62=6.63<F0.05,1,3=10.13 (P=0.082)F_0=\frac{1469.5-457.9}{152.62}=6.63<F_{0.05,1,3}=10.13\ (P=0.082)

在已有 x1x_1 的模型中加入 load 不显著。

(f) 加交互项 x1x2x_1x_2:y^=483.97−7.656x1−0.2221x2+0.004087x1x2\hat y=483.97-7.656x_1-0.2221x_2+0.004087x_1x_2,SSE=293.98SSE=293.98,F0=67.92>F0.05,3,2=19.16F_0=67.92>F_{0.05,3,2}=19.16(P = 0.0145),整体显著。

(g) F0=457.86−293.98293.98/2=1.11<F0.05,1,2=18.51F_0=\dfrac{457.86-293.98}{293.98/2}=1.11<F_{0.05,1,2}=18.51(P = 0.40),交互项 不显著。

HW2 Q3 由 R2R^2 反推 F,比较简化模型和 CpC_p

30 个观测,完整模型 9 个回归变量,σ^2=MSE=100\hat\sigma^2=MSE=100,R2=0.92R^2=0.92。 (a) 计算回归显著性的 F 统计量(α=0.05\alpha=0.05);(b) 只用其中 4 个变量的模型 SSE=2200SSE=2200,估计其 σ2\sigma^2,简化模型更好吗?(c) 求简化模型的 CpC_p。

查看答案

(a) SSE=MSE(n−p)=100×20=2000SSE=MSE(n-p)=100\times20=2000,SST=SSE/(1−R2)=2000/0.08=25000SST=SSE/(1-R^2)=2000/0.08=25000,SSR=23000SSR=23000。

F0=23000/9100=25.56>F0.05,9,20=2.39F_0=\frac{23000/9}{100}=25.56>F_{0.05,9,20}=2.39

拒绝 H0H_0,回归显著。

(b) σ^reduced2=2200/(30−5)=88<100\hat\sigma^2_{reduced}=2200/(30-5)=88<100。简化模型的 MSE 更小、变量更少,更好。

(c) Cp=SSEpσ^full2−n+2p=2200100−30+2(5)=2C_p=\dfrac{SSE_p}{\hat\sigma^2_{full}}-n+2p=\dfrac{2200}{100}-30+2(5)=2。 Cp=2≤p=5C_p=2\le p=5,说明简化模型几乎无偏,结论同样是简化模型更好。

4. Logistic 回归

核心公式

p(X)=Pr⁡(Y=1∣X)=eβ0+β1X1+⋯+βpXp1+eβ0+β1X1+⋯+βpXp,log⁡p(X)1−p(X)=β0+β1X1+⋯+βpXpp(X)=\Pr(Y=1\mid X)=\frac{e^{\beta_0+\beta_1X_1+\cdots+\beta_pX_p}}{1+e^{\beta_0+\beta_1X_1+\cdots+\beta_pX_p}},\qquad \log\frac{p(X)}{1-p(X)}=\beta_0+\beta_1X_1+\cdots+\beta_pX_p
  • βj\beta_j 的解释:其他变量不变时,XjX_j 增加 1,log-odds 增加 βj\beta_j(odds 乘以 eβje^{\beta_j})。
  • p(X)=0.5p(X)=0.5 等价于 log-odds =0=0。
  • Bernoulli PMF:P(y)=py(1−p)1−yP(y)=p^y(1-p)^{1-y},y∈{0,1}y\in\{0,1\}。

Exam Q5 学习时长、GPA 与拿 A 的概率

X1X_1 = 学习小时数,X2X_2 = 本科 GPA,YY = 是否拿 A。估计系数 β^0=−6\hat\beta_0=-6,β^1=0.05\hat\beta_1=0.05,β^2=1\hat\beta_2=1。 (a) 学习 40 小时、GPA 3.5 的学生拿 A 的概率?(b) 这个学生需要学习多少小时才有 50% 的概率拿 A?

查看答案

(a) η=−6+0.05(40)+1(3.5)=−0.5\eta=-6+0.05(40)+1(3.5)=-0.5

p^=e−0.51+e−0.5=0.3775\hat p=\frac{e^{-0.5}}{1+e^{-0.5}}=0.3775

(b) p=0.5  ⟺  η=0p=0.5\iff\eta=0:−6+0.05h+3.5=0⇒h=50-6+0.05h+3.5=0\Rightarrow h=50 小时。

Exam Q7 类别编码为 {−1,1}\{-1,1\} 时的 logistic 形式

类别编码为 (0,1)(0,1) 时,Pr⁡(y=1∣X)=eXβ1+eXβ\Pr(y=1|X)=\dfrac{e^{X\beta}}{1+e^{X\beta}},Pr⁡(y=0∣X)=11+eXβ\Pr(y=0|X)=\dfrac{1}{1+e^{X\beta}}。如果编码为 (−1,1)(-1,1),概率可以写成 Pr⁡(y=1 or −1∣X)=11+e−y(Xβ)\Pr(y=1\text{ or }-1\mid X)=\dfrac{1}{1+e^{-y(X\beta)}}。解释原因,并写出 y∈{−1,1}y\in\{-1,1\} 时的 Bernoulli PMF。

查看答案

分子分母同除 eXβe^{X\beta}:

Pr⁡(y=1∣X)=eXβ1+eXβ=11+e−Xβ,Pr⁡(y=−1∣X)=11+eXβ=11+e−(−1)Xβ\Pr(y=1|X)=\frac{e^{X\beta}}{1+e^{X\beta}}=\frac{1}{1+e^{-X\beta}},\qquad \Pr(y=-1|X)=\frac{1}{1+e^{X\beta}}=\frac{1}{1+e^{-(-1)X\beta}}

两式只差 XβX\beta 前的符号,正好就是 yy 的取值,所以统一成 11+e−yXβ\dfrac{1}{1+e^{-yX\beta}}。

Bernoulli PMF:y∈{0,1}y\in\{0,1\} 时 P(y)=py(1−p)1−yP(y)=p^y(1-p)^{1-y}。令 y∈{−1,1}y\in\{-1,1\},用 1+y2∈{0,1}\frac{1+y}{2}\in\{0,1\} 替换:

P(y)=p1+y2(1−p)1−y2P(y)=p^{\frac{1+y}{2}}(1-p)^{\frac{1-y}{2}}

y=1y=1 时得 pp,y=−1y=-1 时得 1−p1-p。

Lecture 05 p.11–12 Default 数据

模型 1:Default ~ balance(p.11)

CoefficientStd. errorz-statisticp-value
Intercept−10.65130.3612−29.5<0.0001
balance0.00550.000224.9<0.0001

模型 2:Default ~ balance + income(千美元)+ student(p.12)

CoefficientStd. errorz-statisticp-value
Intercept−10.86900.4923−22.08<0.0001
balance0.00570.000224.74<0.0001
income0.00300.00820.370.7115
student[Yes]−0.64680.2362−2.740.0062

对照:只用 student(p.13,confounding)

CoefficientStd. errorz-statisticp-value
Intercept−3.50410.0707−49.55<0.0001
student[Yes]0.40490.11503.520.0004

(1) 用模型 1,balance 为 1000 时违约概率? (2) 用模型 2(课件计算时 balance 系数取 0.00574),balance 1500、income 40 的学生与非学生违约概率?

查看答案

(1) p^=e−10.6513+0.0055(1000)1+e−10.6513+0.0055(1000)=0.00576\hat p=\dfrac{e^{-10.6513+0.0055(1000)}}{1+e^{-10.6513+0.0055(1000)}}=0.00576

(2) 学生:η=−10.869+0.00574(1500)+0.003(40)−0.6468=−2.786\eta=-10.869+0.00574(1500)+0.003(40)-0.6468=-2.786,p^=0.058\hat p=0.058 非学生:η=−2.139\eta=-2.139,p^=0.105\hat p=0.105

同样的 balance 和 income 下,学生违约概率更低(student 系数为负)。课件 p.13 讲的 confounding:单独用 student 时系数为正,因为学生平均 balance 更高。

HW3 Q2 Titanic:Bernoulli 与 Binomial 两种响应格式

(a) 用 Pclass、Sex、Age 拟合 logistic 回归(Bernoulli 格式);(b) 把 Age 按 5 岁分箱为 Age_Range 再拟合;(c) 按 Pclass、Sex、Age_Range 分组,转为 Binomial 格式(Survived、Died 两列)拟合;(d) 模型是否充分?

查看答案
  • (b) 与 (a) 不同:Age 从连续变量变成分箱变量,模型的设计矩阵变了。
  • (c) 与 (b) 的 系数相同:分组后每一行只是把相同预测变量组合下的 Bernoulli 观测合并成 Binomial 计数,似然函数相同(只差一个与参数无关的组合数常数),所以 MLE 一样;但 deviance 和自由度不同。
  • (d) 看 residual deviance 与自由度:Binomial 格式下 deviance/df 接近 1、拟合优度检验 P 值大,说明模型充分。

5. Bayes 分类器、LDA、QDA 与 KNN

核心公式

Pr⁡(Y=k∣X=x)=πkfk(x)∑l=1Kπlfl(x),fk(x)=12πσkexp⁡(−(x−μk)22σk2)\Pr(Y=k\mid X=x)=\frac{\pi_kf_k(x)}{\sum_{l=1}^K\pi_lf_l(x)},\qquad f_k(x)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}\sigma_k}\exp\Big(-\frac{(x-\mu_k)^2}{2\sigma_k^2}\Big)
  • LDA:各类方差相同 σ12=⋯=σK2=σ2\sigma_1^2=\dots=\sigma_K^2=\sigma^2,判别函数 δk(x)=xμkσ2−μk22σ2+log⁡πk\delta_k(x)=x\dfrac{\mu_k}{\sigma^2}-\dfrac{\mu_k^2}{2\sigma^2}+\log\pi_k,对 xx 线性。
  • QDA:各类方差不同,判别函数含 x2x^2,边界是二次的。
  • LDA bias 高、variance 低;QDA bias 低、variance 高。数据少时偏向 LDA,数据多或边界非线性时偏向 QDA。
  • KNN:KK 小 → 边界灵活(低 bias、高 variance);KK 大 → 边界接近线性。

Exam Q3 LDA 还是 QDA?

(a) 如果 Bayes 决策边界是线性的,LDA 和 QDA 哪个在训练集上表现更好?测试集呢? (b) 如果边界是非线性的呢? (c) 一般来说,随着样本量 nn 增加,QDA 相对 LDA 的测试准确率会提高、下降还是不变?为什么? (d) 判断对错:即使 Bayes 边界是线性的,用 QDA 也能得到更低的测试错误率,因为 QDA 足够灵活,可以拟合线性边界。

查看答案

(a) 训练集:QDA 更好(更灵活,能拟合噪声)。测试集:LDA 更好(QDA 多出来的参数只带来过拟合)。

(b) 训练集和测试集都是 QDA 更好。

(c) 提高。nn 越大,QDA 估计更多参数带来的 variance 越小,它低 bias 的优势就显现出来。

(d) 错。边界是线性时,QDA 的额外灵活性不会降低 bias,只会增加 variance(样本少时尤其明显),测试错误率通常比 LDA 更高。

Exam Q6 用 Bayes 公式预测是否分红

用去年利润百分比 XX 预测公司今年是否分红。分红公司 Xˉ=10\bar X=10,不分红公司 Xˉ=0\bar X=0,两组方差都是 σ^2=36\hat\sigma^2=36,80% 的公司分红。假设 XX 服从正态分布,预测去年利润 X=4X=4 的公司今年分红的概率。

查看答案

πyes=0.8\pi_{yes}=0.8,πno=0.2\pi_{no}=0.2,μyes=10\mu_{yes}=10,μno=0\mu_{no}=0,σ2=36\sigma^2=36。正态密度里的 12πσ\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}\sigma} 两类相同,可以约掉:

Pr⁡(yes∣X=4)=0.8 e−(4−10)2/720.8 e−(4−10)2/72+0.2 e−(4−0)2/72=0.8(0.6065)0.8(0.6065)+0.2(0.8007)=0.48520.6453=0.752\Pr(\text{yes}\mid X=4)=\frac{0.8\,e^{-(4-10)^2/72}}{0.8\,e^{-(4-10)^2/72}+0.2\,e^{-(4-0)^2/72}}=\frac{0.8(0.6065)}{0.8(0.6065)+0.2(0.8007)}=\frac{0.4852}{0.6453}=0.752

HW3 Q1 证明 QDA(p = 1)的 Bayes 分类器是二次的

X∣Y=k∼N(μk,σk2)X\mid Y=k\sim N(\mu_k,\sigma_k^2),各类方差不同。证明 Bayes 分类器是 xx 的二次函数。

查看答案

Bayes 分类器选使 πkfk(x)\pi_kf_k(x) 最大的 kk(分母对所有类相同)。取对数:

log⁡(πkfk(x))=log⁡πk−log⁡σk−12log⁡(2π)−(x−μk)22σk2\log\big(\pi_kf_k(x)\big)=\log\pi_k-\log\sigma_k-\tfrac12\log(2\pi)-\frac{(x-\mu_k)^2}{2\sigma_k^2}

去掉与 kk 无关的 −12log⁡(2π)-\frac12\log(2\pi),展开平方:

δk(x)=−x22σk2+μkxσk2−μk22σk2−log⁡σk+log⁡πk\delta_k(x)=-\frac{x^2}{2\sigma_k^2}+\frac{\mu_kx}{\sigma_k^2}-\frac{\mu_k^2}{2\sigma_k^2}-\log\sigma_k+\log\pi_k

因为 σk\sigma_k 随类别变化,x2x^2 项的系数 −12σk2-\frac{1}{2\sigma_k^2} 在比较不同类时不会抵消,所以 δk(x)\delta_k(x) 和决策边界 δk(x)=δl(x)\delta_k(x)=\delta_l(x) 都是 xx 的 二次 函数。若 σk=σ\sigma_k=\sigma 相同,x2x^2 项抵消,就退化成 LDA 的线性形式。

Lecture 06 p.11 LDA 一维例子

两类正态密度与 Bayes 边界
左:两类真实密度,虚线是 Bayes 边界 x = 0。右:每类 20 个样本的直方图,实线是 LDA 估计的边界。(Lecture 06 p.11)

μ1=−1.5\mu_1=-1.5,μ2=1.5\mu_2=1.5,π1=π2=0.5\pi_1=\pi_2=0.5,σ2=1\sigma^2=1,Bayes 决策边界在哪里?

查看答案

令 δ1(x)=δ2(x)\delta_1(x)=\delta_2(x),π\pi 相等时边界为 x=μ1+μ22=0x=\dfrac{\mu_1+\mu_2}{2}=0:x<0x<0 归为第 1 类,否则归为第 2 类。用训练数据估计时,边界就是两类样本均值的中点。

HW1 Q5 KNN 手算

6 个训练观测:

ObsX1X_1X2X_2X3X_3Y
1030Red
2200Red
3013Red
4012Green
5−101Green
6111Red

在 X1=X2=X3=0X_1=X_2=X_3=0 处预测 Y。(a) 欧氏距离;(b) K=1K=1 和 K=3K=3 的预测;(c) 如果 Bayes 决策边界高度非线性,KK 应该取大还是小?

查看答案

(a) 距离:Obs1 = 3,Obs2 = 2,Obs3 = 10\sqrt{10} = 3.16,Obs4 = 5\sqrt5 = 2.24,Obs5 = 2\sqrt2 = 1.41,Obs6 = 3\sqrt3 = 1.73。

(b) K=1K=1:最近的是 Obs5(Green)→ Green。K=3K=3:Obs5(Green)、Obs6(Red)、Obs2(Red)→ Red(2/3)。

(c) 取 小 的 KK。小 KK 边界灵活,能贴合非线性边界;大 KK 边界趋于线性。

This page opens with a formula sheet covering all 6 lectures, then groups the 7 exam practice questions into 5 topics. Each topic starts with the key formulas, then the exam question, then the matching lecture examples and homework problems. Click Show answer to unfold a solution.

0. Formula sheet (Lectures 01–06)

In lecture order, with slide page numbers in brackets. Read it top to bottom before the exam.

Lecture 01 · Probability and statistics review

Common distributions

DistributionPMF / PDFE(X)E(X)Var⁡(X)\operatorname{Var}(X)
Bernoulli(p)(p) (p.53)p(x)=px(1−p)1−x, x∈{0,1}p(x)=p^x(1-p)^{1-x},\ x\in\{0,1\}ppp(1−p)p(1-p)
Binomial(n,p)(n,p) (p.55)(nx)px(1−p)n−x\binom{n}{x}p^x(1-p)^{n-x}npnpnp(1−p)np(1-p)
Poisson(λ)(\lambda) (p.57)e−λλxx!\dfrac{e^{-\lambda}\lambda^x}{x!}λ\lambdaλ\lambda
Normal(μ,σ2)(\mu,\sigma^2) (p.66)1σ2πexp⁡ ⁣[−(x−μ)22σ2]\dfrac{1}{\sigma\sqrt{2\pi}}\exp\!\Big[-\dfrac{(x-\mu)^2}{2\sigma^2}\Big]μ\muσ2\sigma^2
  • Poisson process (p.59): P(N(t)=n)=(λt)ne−λtn!P(N(t)=n)=\dfrac{(\lambda t)^ne^{-\lambda t}}{n!}, E[N(t)]=λtE[N(t)]=\lambda t.
  • Standardizing (p.66, 86): Z=X−μσ∼N(0,1)Z=\dfrac{X-\mu}{\sigma}\sim N(0,1), Φ(t)=P(Z<t)\Phi(t)=P(Z<t).

Conditional probability and Bayes’ formula (pp.70–71)

P(A∣B)=P(AB)P(B),P(B∣A)=P(A∣B)P(B)P(A),P(A)=∑iP(A∣Bi)P(Bi)P(A\mid B)=\frac{P(AB)}{P(B)},\qquad P(B\mid A)=\frac{P(A\mid B)P(B)}{P(A)},\qquad P(A)=\sum_iP(A\mid B_i)P(B_i)

Expectation and variance (pp.76–84)

E(X)=∑xx p(x)  or  ∫−∞∞xf(x) dx,Var⁡(X)=E[(X−μ)2]=E(X2)−[E(X)]2E(X)=\sum_x x\,p(x)\ \ \text{or}\ \ \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}x f(x)\,dx,\qquad \operatorname{Var}(X)=E[(X-\mu)^2]=E(X^2)-[E(X)]^2 E(aX+b)=aE(X)+b,Var⁡(aX+b)=a2Var⁡(X),σaX+b=∣a∣σXE(aX+b)=aE(X)+b,\qquad \operatorname{Var}(aX+b)=a^2\operatorname{Var}(X),\qquad \sigma_{aX+b}=|a|\sigma_X

Covariance and correlation (p.85)

Cov⁡(X,Y)=E[(X−μX)(Y−μY)],ρ=σXYσXσY∈[−1,1]\operatorname{Cov}(X,Y)=E[(X-\mu_X)(Y-\mu_Y)],\qquad \rho=\frac{\sigma_{XY}}{\sigma_X\sigma_Y}\in[-1,1] Var⁡(X±Y)=Var⁡(X)+Var⁡(Y)±2Cov⁡(X,Y)\operatorname{Var}(X\pm Y)=\operatorname{Var}(X)+\operatorname{Var}(Y)\pm2\operatorname{Cov}(X,Y)

Independent ⇒ Cov⁡=0\operatorname{Cov}=0, but not the other way round.

Lecture 02 · Predictive modeling basics

Model and error decomposition (pp.17, 44)

Y=f(X)+ε,E[(Y−Y^)2]=[f(X)−f^(X)]2⏟reducible+Var⁡(ε)⏟irreducibleY=f(X)+\varepsilon,\qquad E\big[(Y-\hat Y)^2\big]=\underbrace{[f(X)-\hat f(X)]^2}_{\text{reducible}}+\underbrace{\operatorname{Var}(\varepsilon)}_{\text{irreducible}}

MSE and the bias-variance decomposition (pp.34, 42–44)

MSE=1n∑i=1n(yi−f^(xi))2,E[(y0−f^(x0))2]=Var⁡(f^(x0))+[Bias⁡(f^(x0))]2+Var⁡(ε)MSE=\frac1n\sum_{i=1}^n\big(y_i-\hat f(x_i)\big)^2,\qquad E\big[(y_0-\hat f(x_0))^2\big]=\operatorname{Var}(\hat f(x_0))+[\operatorname{Bias}(\hat f(x_0))]^2+\operatorname{Var}(\varepsilon)

Unbiased estimators (pp.40–41)

  • Definition: E(Θ^)=θE(\hat\Theta)=\theta; bias =E(Θ^)−θ=E(\hat\Theta)-\theta.
  • The sample mean is unbiased: Xˉ=1n∑Xi\bar X=\dfrac1n\sum X_i, E(Xˉ)=μE(\bar X)=\mu, Var⁡(Xˉ)=σ2n\operatorname{Var}(\bar X)=\dfrac{\sigma^2}{n}.
  • The sample variance is unbiased (divide by n−1n-1):
S2=1n−1∑i=1n(Xi−Xˉ)2,E(S2)=σ2S^2=\frac{1}{n-1}\sum_{i=1}^n(X_i-\bar X)^2,\qquad E(S^2)=\sigma^2

Proof sketch: E[∑(Xi−Xˉ)2]=∑E(Xi2)−nE(Xˉ2)=n(σ2+μ2)−n(σ2n+μ2)=(n−1)σ2E\big[\sum(X_i-\bar X)^2\big]=\sum E(X_i^2)-nE(\bar X^2)=n(\sigma^2+\mu^2)-n\big(\tfrac{\sigma^2}{n}+\mu^2\big)=(n-1)\sigma^2.

  • The unbiased estimator with the smallest variance is the minimum variance unbiased estimator (MVUE).

Classification error, Bayes classifier and KNN (pp.46–49)

Error rate=1n∑i=1nI(yi≠y^i),Bayes: y^0=arg⁡max⁡jPr⁡(Y=j∣X=x0)\text{Error rate}=\frac1n\sum_{i=1}^nI(y_i\ne\hat y_i),\qquad \text{Bayes: }\hat y_0=\arg\max_j\Pr(Y=j\mid X=x_0) Bayes error rate=1−E[max⁡jPr⁡(Y=j∣X)],KNN: Pr⁡(Y=j∣X=x0)=1K∑i∈N0I(yi=j)\text{Bayes error rate}=1-E\Big[\max_j\Pr(Y=j\mid X)\Big],\qquad \text{KNN: }\Pr(Y=j\mid X=x_0)=\frac1K\sum_{i\in N_0}I(y_i=j)

Lecture 03 · Simple linear regression

Model and least squares (pp.8–9)

Y=β0+β1x+ε,Sxx=∑(xi−xˉ)2=∑xi2−(∑xi)2n,Sxy=∑(xi−xˉ)(yi−yˉ)=∑xiyi−(∑xi)(∑yi)nY=\beta_0+\beta_1x+\varepsilon,\qquad S_{xx}=\sum(x_i-\bar x)^2=\sum x_i^2-\frac{(\sum x_i)^2}{n},\qquad S_{xy}=\sum(x_i-\bar x)(y_i-\bar y)=\sum x_iy_i-\frac{(\sum x_i)(\sum y_i)}{n} β^1=SxySxx,β^0=yˉ−β^1xˉ,ei=yi−y^i\hat\beta_1=\frac{S_{xy}}{S_{xx}},\qquad \hat\beta_0=\bar y-\hat\beta_1\bar x,\qquad e_i=y_i-\hat y_i

Unbiased estimator of σ2\sigma^2 (p.12)

SSE=∑i=1n(yi−y^i)2,σ^2=SSEn−2SS_E=\sum_{i=1}^n(y_i-\hat y_i)^2,\qquad \hat\sigma^2=\frac{SS_E}{n-2}

(Divide by n−2n-2 because two parameters, β0\beta_0 and β1\beta_1, were estimated; multiple regression generalizes this to n−pn-p.)

Mean, variance and standard error of the coefficients (p.16)

E(β^1)=β1,V(β^1)=σ2Sxx,E(β^0)=β0,V(β^0)=σ2[1n+xˉ2Sxx]E(\hat\beta_1)=\beta_1,\quad V(\hat\beta_1)=\frac{\sigma^2}{S_{xx}},\qquad E(\hat\beta_0)=\beta_0,\quad V(\hat\beta_0)=\sigma^2\Big[\frac1n+\frac{\bar x^2}{S_{xx}}\Big] se(β^1)=σ^2Sxx,se(β^0)=σ^2[1n+xˉ2Sxx]se(\hat\beta_1)=\sqrt{\frac{\hat\sigma^2}{S_{xx}}},\qquad se(\hat\beta_0)=\sqrt{\hat\sigma^2\Big[\frac1n+\frac{\bar x^2}{S_{xx}}\Big]}

t-tests and confidence intervals (pp.13–20)

T=Xˉ−μS/n∼tn−1,Xˉ±tα/2,n−1SnT=\frac{\bar X-\mu}{S/\sqrt n}\sim t_{n-1},\qquad \bar X\pm t_{\alpha/2,n-1}\frac{S}{\sqrt n} T0=β^1−β1,0se(β^1)∼tn−2,β^1±tα/2,n−2σ^2Sxx,β^0±tα/2,n−2σ^2[1n+xˉ2Sxx]T_0=\frac{\hat\beta_1-\beta_{1,0}}{se(\hat\beta_1)}\sim t_{n-2},\qquad \hat\beta_1\pm t_{\alpha/2,n-2}\sqrt{\frac{\hat\sigma^2}{S_{xx}}},\qquad \hat\beta_0\pm t_{\alpha/2,n-2}\sqrt{\hat\sigma^2\Big[\frac1n+\frac{\bar x^2}{S_{xx}}\Big]}

Prediction interval (pp.23–24)

y^0±tα/2,n−2σ^2[1+1n+(x0−xˉ)2Sxx]\hat y_0\pm t_{\alpha/2,n-2}\sqrt{\hat\sigma^2\Big[1+\frac1n+\frac{(x_0-\bar x)^2}{S_{xx}}\Big]}

A prediction interval is always wider than the confidence interval on the mean; the extra “1” is the new observation’s own error.

ANOVA (p.25)

SST=∑(yi−yˉ)2=SSR+SSE,SSR=∑(y^i−yˉ)2SS_T=\sum(y_i-\bar y)^2=SS_R+SS_E,\qquad SS_R=\sum(\hat y_i-\bar y)^2

Correlation and regression (p.29)

ρ=σXYσXσY,β1=ρσYσX,β0=μY−μXρσYσX\rho=\frac{\sigma_{XY}}{\sigma_X\sigma_Y},\qquad \beta_1=\rho\frac{\sigma_Y}{\sigma_X},\qquad \beta_0=\mu_Y-\mu_X\rho\frac{\sigma_Y}{\sigma_X}

Maximum likelihood (pp.35–38)

L(θ)=∏i=1nf(xi∣θ),l(β0,β1,σ2)=−n2ln⁡2π−n2ln⁡σ2−12σ2∑(yi−β0−β1xi)2L(\theta)=\prod_{i=1}^nf(x_i\mid\theta),\qquad l(\beta_0,\beta_1,\sigma^2)=-\frac n2\ln2\pi-\frac n2\ln\sigma^2-\frac{1}{2\sigma^2}\sum(y_i-\beta_0-\beta_1x_i)^2

Setting the derivatives in β0,β1\beta_0,\beta_1 to zero gives the least squares estimates. The MLE of σ2\sigma^2 is SSEn\dfrac{SS_E}{n}, which is biased, so we use SSEn−2\dfrac{SS_E}{n-2}.

Lecture 04 · Multiple linear regression

Model and matrix form (pp.6, 14–15)

yi=β0+∑j=1kβjxij+εi,y=Xβ+ε,β^=(X′X)−1X′y,y^=Xβ^y_i=\beta_0+\sum_{j=1}^k\beta_jx_{ij}+\varepsilon_i,\qquad \mathbf y=X\boldsymbol\beta+\boldsymbol\varepsilon,\qquad \hat{\boldsymbol\beta}=(X'X)^{-1}X'\mathbf y,\qquad \hat{\mathbf y}=X\hat{\boldsymbol\beta}

Unbiased estimator of σ2\sigma^2 (p.16), with p=k+1p=k+1 parameters

σ^2=∑ei2n−p=SSEn−p=MSE\hat\sigma^2=\frac{\sum e_i^2}{n-p}=\frac{SS_E}{n-p}=MS_E

Properties of the coefficients (pp.28–29)

E(β^)=β,Cov⁡(β^)=σ2(X′X)−1=σ2C,Var⁡(β^j)=σ2Cjj,Cov⁡(β^i,β^j)=σ2CijE(\hat{\boldsymbol\beta})=\boldsymbol\beta,\qquad \operatorname{Cov}(\hat{\boldsymbol\beta})=\sigma^2(X'X)^{-1}=\sigma^2C,\qquad \operatorname{Var}(\hat\beta_j)=\sigma^2C_{jj},\qquad \operatorname{Cov}(\hat\beta_i,\hat\beta_j)=\sigma^2C_{ij}

Overall F-test (p.25)

SourceSSdfMSF0F_0
RegressionSSRSS_RkkMSR=SSR/kMS_R=SS_R/kMSR/MSEMS_R/MS_E
ErrorSSESS_En−pn-pMSE=SSE/(n−p)MS_E=SS_E/(n-p)
TotalSSTSS_Tn−1n-1

H0:β1=⋯=βk=0H_0:\beta_1=\dots=\beta_k=0; reject if F0>fα,k,n−pF_0>f_{\alpha,k,n-p}.

t-test and CI for one coefficient (pp.30, 33)

T0=β^j−βj0σ^2Cjj  (reject if ∣T0∣>tα/2,n−p),β^j±tα/2,n−pσ^2CjjT_0=\frac{\hat\beta_j-\beta_{j0}}{\sqrt{\hat\sigma^2C_{jj}}}\ \ (\text{reject if }|T_0|>t_{\alpha/2,n-p}),\qquad \hat\beta_j\pm t_{\alpha/2,n-p}\sqrt{\hat\sigma^2C_{jj}}

CI on the mean response and prediction interval (pp.35, 38)

μ^Y∣x0=x0′β^,μ^Y∣x0±tα/2,n−pσ^2 x0′(X′X)−1x0\hat\mu_{Y|x_0}=\mathbf x_0'\hat{\boldsymbol\beta},\qquad \hat\mu_{Y|x_0}\pm t_{\alpha/2,n-p}\sqrt{\hat\sigma^2\,\mathbf x_0'(X'X)^{-1}\mathbf x_0} y^0±tα/2,n−pσ^2(1+x0′(X′X)−1x0)\hat y_0\pm t_{\alpha/2,n-p}\sqrt{\hat\sigma^2\big(1+\mathbf x_0'(X'X)^{-1}\mathbf x_0\big)}

R2R^2, adjusted R2R^2 and standardized residuals (pp.41, 43)

R2=SSRSST=1−SSESST,Radj2=1−SSE/(n−p)SST/(n−1),di=eiMSER^2=\frac{SS_R}{SS_T}=1-\frac{SS_E}{SS_T},\qquad R^2_{adj}=1-\frac{SS_E/(n-p)}{SS_T/(n-1)},\qquad d_i=\frac{e_i}{\sqrt{MS_E}}

Interactions, polynomials and dummy variables (pp.47–64)

Y=β0+β1x1+β2x2+β12x1x2+β11x12+β22x22+εY=\beta_0+\beta_1x_1+\beta_2x_2+\beta_{12}x_1x_2+\beta_{11}x_1^2+\beta_{22}x_2^2+\varepsilon

Linear in the parameters means it is still linear regression. A categorical variable with mm levels uses m−1m-1 0/1 dummy variables; the remaining level is the baseline.

Extra sum of squares / partial F (pp.66–68)

SSR(β)=β^′X′y−(∑yi)2n,MSE=y′y−β^′X′yn−pSS_R(\boldsymbol\beta)=\hat{\boldsymbol\beta}'X'\mathbf y-\frac{(\sum y_i)^2}{n},\qquad MS_E=\frac{\mathbf y'\mathbf y-\hat{\boldsymbol\beta}'X'\mathbf y}{n-p} F0=SSR(β1∣β2)/rMSE,SSR(β1∣β2)=SSR(β)−SSR(β2),reject if F0>fα,r,n−pF_0=\frac{SS_R(\boldsymbol\beta_1\mid\boldsymbol\beta_2)/r}{MS_E},\qquad SS_R(\boldsymbol\beta_1\mid\boldsymbol\beta_2)=SS_R(\boldsymbol\beta)-SS_R(\boldsymbol\beta_2),\qquad \text{reject if }F_0>f_{\alpha,r,n-p}

Model selection criteria (pp.73–75)

AIC=−2ln⁡L+2p=nln⁡(MSE)+2p+C,BIC=−2ln⁡L+pln⁡n=nln⁡(MSE)+pln⁡n+CAIC=-2\ln L+2p=n\ln(MSE)+2p+C,\qquad BIC=-2\ln L+p\ln n=n\ln(MSE)+p\ln n+C Cp=SSE(p)σ^full2−n+2p (pick Cp≈p),PRESS=∑i=1n(yi−y^(i))2=∑i=1n(ei1−hii)2C_p=\frac{SS_E(p)}{\hat\sigma^2_{full}}-n+2p\ (\text{pick }C_p\approx p),\qquad PRESS=\sum_{i=1}^n\big(y_i-\hat y_{(i)}\big)^2=\sum_{i=1}^n\Big(\frac{e_i}{1-h_{ii}}\Big)^2

Smaller AIC, BIC and PRESS are better; BIC penalizes size more and prefers simpler models. Selection methods: all possible regressions, forward, backward, stepwise (pp.76–84).

Multicollinearity (pp.86–87)

VIF(βj)=11−Rj2VIF(\beta_j)=\frac{1}{1-R_j^2}

Rj2R_j^2 is the R2R^2 from regressing xjx_j on the other regressors. VIF>10VIF>10 (some say >4>4 or 55) signals serious multicollinearity. A significant overall F with no significant individual t-tests is another sign.

Lecture 05 · Logistic regression

Model and odds (pp.4–5)

log⁡pi1−pi=β0+β1xi1+⋯+βpxip,pi=eβ0+β1xi1+⋯+βpxip1+eβ0+β1xi1+⋯+βpxip\log\frac{p_i}{1-p_i}=\beta_0+\beta_1x_{i1}+\dots+\beta_px_{ip},\qquad p_i=\frac{e^{\beta_0+\beta_1x_{i1}+\dots+\beta_px_{ip}}}{1+e^{\beta_0+\beta_1x_{i1}+\dots+\beta_px_{ip}}}

p/(1−p)p/(1-p) is the odds, in (0,∞)(0,\infty); βj\beta_j is the change in log-odds when xjx_j rises by 1.

Maximum likelihood (pp.6–7)

L(β)=∏i=1npiYi(1−pi)1−Yi,l(β)=∑i=1n[Yi∑j=0pβjxij−log⁡(1+e∑jβjxij)]L(\boldsymbol\beta)=\prod_{i=1}^np_i^{Y_i}(1-p_i)^{1-Y_i},\qquad l(\boldsymbol\beta)=\sum_{i=1}^n\Big[Y_i\sum_{j=0}^p\beta_jx_{ij}-\log\big(1+e^{\sum_j\beta_jx_{ij}}\big)\Big] ∂l∂βm=∑i=1nxim(Yi−pi)=0,Newton-Raphson: β^n+1=β^n−l′(β^n)l′′(β^n)\frac{\partial l}{\partial\beta_m}=\sum_{i=1}^nx_{im}\big(Y_i-p_i\big)=0,\qquad \text{Newton-Raphson: }\hat\beta_{n+1}=\hat\beta_n-\frac{l'(\hat\beta_n)}{l''(\hat\beta_n)}

Likelihood ratio test (p.9)

D=−2log⁡Λ=−2log⁡L(β^0,…,β^p−1,0)L(β^0,…,β^p) ∼ χ12(reject H0:βp=0 if D>χ12(α))D=-2\log\Lambda=-2\log\frac{L(\hat\beta_0,\dots,\hat\beta_{p-1},0)}{L(\hat\beta_0,\dots,\hat\beta_p)}\ \sim\ \chi^2_1\quad(\text{reject }H_0:\beta_p=0\text{ if }D>\chi^2_1(\alpha))

Binomial logistic regression (grouped data, pp.15–16)

Pr⁡(yi)=(niyi)piyi(1−pi)ni−yi,l(β)=∑i=1N[yi∑jβjxij−nilog⁡(1+e∑jβjxij)]\Pr(y_i)=\binom{n_i}{y_i}p_i^{y_i}(1-p_i)^{n_i-y_i},\qquad l(\boldsymbol\beta)=\sum_{i=1}^N\Big[y_i\sum_j\beta_jx_{ij}-n_i\log\big(1+e^{\sum_j\beta_jx_{ij}}\big)\Big]

Multinomial logistic regression (pp.19–20), class KK as baseline

Pr⁡(Y=k∣x)=eβk0+βk1x1+⋯+βkpxp1+∑l=1K−1eβl0+βl1x1+⋯+βlpxp,Pr⁡(Y=K∣x)=11+∑l=1K−1eβl0+⋯+βlpxp\Pr(Y=k\mid x)=\frac{e^{\beta_{k0}+\beta_{k1}x_1+\dots+\beta_{kp}x_p}}{1+\sum_{l=1}^{K-1}e^{\beta_{l0}+\beta_{l1}x_1+\dots+\beta_{lp}x_p}},\qquad \Pr(Y=K\mid x)=\frac{1}{1+\sum_{l=1}^{K-1}e^{\beta_{l0}+\dots+\beta_{lp}x_p}} log⁡Pr⁡(Y=k∣x)Pr⁡(Y=K∣x)=βk0+βk1x1+⋯+βkpxp,Softmax: Pr⁡(Y=k∣x)=eβk0+⋯+βkpxp∑l=1Keβl0+⋯+βlpxp\log\frac{\Pr(Y=k\mid x)}{\Pr(Y=K\mid x)}=\beta_{k0}+\beta_{k1}x_1+\dots+\beta_{kp}x_p,\qquad \text{Softmax: }\Pr(Y=k\mid x)=\frac{e^{\beta_{k0}+\dots+\beta_{kp}x_p}}{\sum_{l=1}^Ke^{\beta_{l0}+\dots+\beta_{lp}x_p}}

Lecture 06 · Discriminant analysis, naive Bayes, Poisson regression and KNN

Bayes’ theorem for classification (p.5)

Pr⁡(Y=k∣X=x)=πkfk(x)∑l=1Kπlfl(x),πk=Pr⁡(Y=k),fk(x)=Pr⁡(X=x∣Y=k)\Pr(Y=k\mid X=x)=\frac{\pi_kf_k(x)}{\sum_{l=1}^K\pi_lf_l(x)},\qquad \pi_k=\Pr(Y=k),\quad f_k(x)=\Pr(X=x\mid Y=k)

LDA, p=1p=1 (pp.9–12), equal variances

δk(x)=x⋅μkσ2−μk22σ2+log⁡πk,K=2, π1=π2⇒x=μ1+μ22\delta_k(x)=x\cdot\frac{\mu_k}{\sigma^2}-\frac{\mu_k^2}{2\sigma^2}+\log\pi_k,\qquad K=2,\ \pi_1=\pi_2\Rightarrow x=\frac{\mu_1+\mu_2}{2} π^k=nkn,μ^k=1nk∑i:yi=kxi,σ^2=1n−K∑k=1K∑i:yi=k(xi−μ^k)2\hat\pi_k=\frac{n_k}{n},\qquad \hat\mu_k=\frac{1}{n_k}\sum_{i:y_i=k}x_i,\qquad \hat\sigma^2=\frac{1}{n-K}\sum_{k=1}^K\sum_{i:y_i=k}(x_i-\hat\mu_k)^2

LDA, p>1p>1 (pp.13–16): X∼N(μk,Σ)X\sim N(\boldsymbol\mu_k,\boldsymbol\Sigma) with a shared covariance matrix

f(x)=1(2π)p/2∣Σ∣1/2exp⁡(−12(x−μ)TΣ−1(x−μ)),δk(x)=xTΣ−1μk−12μkTΣ−1μk+log⁡πkf(x)=\frac{1}{(2\pi)^{p/2}|\boldsymbol\Sigma|^{1/2}}\exp\Big(-\tfrac12(x-\boldsymbol\mu)^T\boldsymbol\Sigma^{-1}(x-\boldsymbol\mu)\Big),\qquad \delta_k(x)=x^T\boldsymbol\Sigma^{-1}\boldsymbol\mu_k-\tfrac12\boldsymbol\mu_k^T\boldsymbol\Sigma^{-1}\boldsymbol\mu_k+\log\pi_k Pr⁡^(Y=k∣X=x)=eδ^k(x)∑l=1Keδ^l(x)\widehat{\Pr}(Y=k\mid X=x)=\frac{e^{\hat\delta_k(x)}}{\sum_{l=1}^Ke^{\hat\delta_l(x)}}

QDA (p.24): each class has its own Σk\boldsymbol\Sigma_k

δk(x)=−12(x−μk)TΣk−1(x−μk)−12log⁡∣Σk∣+log⁡πk\delta_k(x)=-\tfrac12(x-\boldsymbol\mu_k)^T\boldsymbol\Sigma_k^{-1}(x-\boldsymbol\mu_k)-\tfrac12\log|\boldsymbol\Sigma_k|+\log\pi_k

Confusion matrix (pp.17–20)

MeasureDefinitionAlso called
False positive rateFP/NFP/NType I error, 1−1-specificity
True positive rateTP/PTP/Psensitivity, recall, power
Positive predictive valueTP/P^TP/\hat Pprecision
Negative predictive valueTN/N^TN/\hat N
Error rate(FP+FN)/n(FP+FN)/n

Naive Bayes (pp.28–30): predictors independent within each class

fk(x)=fk1(x1)fk2(x2)⋯fkp(xp),Pr⁡(Y=k∣x)=πk∏jfkj(xj)∑lπl∏jflj(xj)f_k(x)=f_{k1}(x_1)f_{k2}(x_2)\cdots f_{kp}(x_p),\qquad \Pr(Y=k\mid x)=\frac{\pi_k\prod_jf_{kj}(x_j)}{\sum_l\pi_l\prod_jf_{lj}(x_j)}

Gaussian naive Bayes: δk(x)∝−12∑j=1p[(xj−μkj)2σkj2+log⁡σkj2]+log⁡πk\delta_k(x)\propto-\dfrac12\sum_{j=1}^p\Big[\dfrac{(x_j-\mu_{kj})^2}{\sigma_{kj}^2}+\log\sigma_{kj}^2\Big]+\log\pi_k

Poisson regression (pp.36–37)

Pr⁡(Y=k)=e−λλkk!,log⁡λ=β0+β1X1+⋯+βpXp,l(β)=∑i=1n(Yilog⁡λi−λi−log⁡Yi!)\Pr(Y=k)=\frac{e^{-\lambda}\lambda^k}{k!},\qquad \log\lambda=\beta_0+\beta_1X_1+\dots+\beta_pX_p,\qquad l(\boldsymbol\beta)=\sum_{i=1}^n\big(Y_i\log\lambda_i-\lambda_i-\log Y_i!\big)

Generalized linear models (pp.40–41)

ModelDistribution of YYLink η(μ)\eta(\mu)
LinearNormalμ\mu
LogisticBernoullilog⁡μ1−μ\log\dfrac{\mu}{1-\mu}
PoissonPoissonlog⁡μ\log\mu

Logistic vs. LDA (p.44): with two classes LDA also has the form log⁡p1(x)1−p1(x)=c0+c1x1+⋯+cpxp\log\dfrac{p_1(x)}{1-p_1(x)}=c_0+c_1x_1+\dots+c_px_p; they differ in estimation (logistic uses the conditional likelihood, LDA the full joint likelihood).

KNN distances (pp.47, 50)

Euclidean: ∑(xi−yi)2,Manhattan: ∑∣xi−yi∣,Minkowski: (∑∣xi−yi∣q)1/q,Hamming: ∑I(xi≠yi)\text{Euclidean: }\sqrt{\sum(x_i-y_i)^2},\qquad \text{Manhattan: }\sum|x_i-y_i|,\qquad \text{Minkowski: }\Big(\sum|x_i-y_i|^q\Big)^{1/q},\qquad \text{Hamming: }\sum I(x_i\ne y_i)

When variables are on different scales, standardize first (e.g. min-max, x−min⁡max⁡−min⁡\dfrac{x-\min}{\max-\min}), then compute distances.

1. Bias-variance and model flexibility

Key formulas

E[(y0−f^(x0))2]=Var⁡(f^(x0))+[Bias⁡(f^(x0))]2+Var⁡(ε)E\big[(y_0-\hat f(x_0))^2\big]=\operatorname{Var}(\hat f(x_0))+\big[\operatorname{Bias}(\hat f(x_0))\big]^2+\operatorname{Var}(\varepsilon)
  • More flexible model: bias goes down, variance goes up; training error keeps falling, test error is U-shaped.
  • Var⁡(ε)\operatorname{Var}(\varepsilon) is the irreducible error, a floor for the test error.
  • Nested models (e.g. linear ⊂ cubic): the bigger model never has a higher training RSS, but its test RSS can be higher.

Exam Q4 Linear vs. cubic regression

n=100n=100 observations, one predictor. Fit a linear regression and a cubic regression Y=β0+β1X+β2X2+β3X3+εY=\beta_0+\beta_1X+\beta_2X^2+\beta_3X^3+\varepsilon.

(a) If the true relationship is linear, Y=β0+β1X+εY=\beta_0+\beta_1X+\varepsilon, compare the training RSS of the two fits. What about test RSS? (b) If the true relationship is not linear, but we don’t know how far it is from linear, compare training RSS and test RSS.

Show answer

(a) Training RSS: cubic is lower (never higher). The cubic model contains the linear one, and least squares uses the extra terms to fit noise. Test RSS: linear is lower. The truth is linear, so the cubic terms only add variance (overfitting) without reducing bias.

(b) Training RSS: cubic is lower, for the same reason, whatever the truth is. Test RSS: not enough information. If the truth is far from linear, the cubic’s bias reduction outweighs its extra variance and its test RSS is lower; if it is only slightly non-linear, the linear model may do better.

HW1 Q1 Flexible vs. inflexible methods

Would a flexible method generally do better or worse than an inflexible one when: (a) nn is extremely large and pp small; (b) pp is extremely large and nn small; (c) the relationship is highly non-linear; (d) the error variance σ2=Var⁡(ε)\sigma^2=\operatorname{Var}(\varepsilon) is extremely high?

Show answer
  • (a) Better: with lots of data the flexible method’s variance stays low, so its lower bias pays off.
  • (b) Worse: few observations and many predictors make a flexible method overfit badly.
  • (c) Better: an inflexible (linear) method has large bias; a flexible one can follow the curve.
  • (d) Worse: with lots of noise, a flexible method chases the noise and its variance rises.

HW1 Q2 The five curves and the bias-variance decomposition

(a) Sketch squared bias, variance, training error, test error and irreducible error as flexibility increases; (b) explain each shape; (c) show E[f(x0)−f^(x0)]2=Var⁡(f^(x0))+[Bias⁡(f^(x0))]2E[f(x_0)-\hat f(x_0)]^2=\operatorname{Var}(\hat f(x_0))+[\operatorname{Bias}(\hat f(x_0))]^2.

Show answer

(a)(b)

  • Squared bias: decreasing. A more flexible model can get closer to the true ff.
  • Variance: increasing. A more flexible fit changes more from one training set to another.
  • Training error: decreasing. The model can hug the training points more and more closely.
  • Test error: U-shaped. It falls while bias drops, then rises once variance dominates.
  • Irreducible error: flat line at Var⁡(ε)\operatorname{Var}(\varepsilon); test error always stays above it.
Sketch of the five curves
Sketch of the five curves: test error = squared bias + variance + irreducible error, lowest at the dotted line.
Bias, variance and test MSE for the three lecture examples
The three lecture examples: red is test MSE, blue is squared bias, orange is variance, and the dashed line is Var(ε). (Lecture 02 p. 45)

(c) Let fˉ=E[f^(x0)]\bar f=E[\hat f(x_0)] and add and subtract it:

E[f−f^]2=E[(f−fˉ)+(fˉ−f^)]2=(f−fˉ)2+2(f−fˉ) E[fˉ−f^]+E[fˉ−f^]2E[f-\hat f]^2=E[(f-\bar f)+(\bar f-\hat f)]^2=(f-\bar f)^2+2(f-\bar f)\,E[\bar f-\hat f]+E[\bar f-\hat f]^2

ff and fˉ\bar f are constants and E[fˉ−f^]=0E[\bar f-\hat f]=0, so the cross term vanishes:

E[f−f^]2=[Bias⁡(f^)]2+Var⁡(f^)E[f-\hat f]^2=[\operatorname{Bias}(\hat f)]^2+\operatorname{Var}(\hat f)

Lecture reference: Lecture 02 pp. 42–45 (The Bias-Variance Trade-Off), pp. 38–39 (two overfitting examples).

2. Regression in matrix form and coefficient inference

Key formulas

y=Xβ+ε,β^=(X′X)−1X′y\mathbf y=X\boldsymbol\beta+\boldsymbol\varepsilon,\qquad \hat{\boldsymbol\beta}=(X'X)^{-1}X'\mathbf y Cov⁡(β^)=σ2(X′X)−1=σ2C,Var⁡(β^j)=σ2Cjj,se(β^j)=σ^2Cjj\operatorname{Cov}(\hat{\boldsymbol\beta})=\sigma^2(X'X)^{-1}=\sigma^2C,\qquad \operatorname{Var}(\hat\beta_j)=\sigma^2C_{jj},\qquad se(\hat\beta_j)=\sqrt{\hat\sigma^2C_{jj}}
  • The first column of XX is all ones (the intercept), so (X′X)−1(X'X)^{-1} is (k+1)×(k+1)(k+1)\times(k+1).
  • t-test for one coefficient: t0=β^j/se(β^j)t_0=\hat\beta_j/se(\hat\beta_j) with n−pn-p degrees of freedom (p=k+1p=k+1).

Exam Q1 Reading variances off (X′X)−1(X'X)^{-1}

(X′X)−1=[0.893758−0.028245−0.0175641−0.0282450.00133290.0001547−0.01756410.00015470.0009108](X'X)^{-1}=\begin{bmatrix}0.893758&-0.028245&-0.0175641\\-0.028245&0.0013329&0.0001547\\-0.0175641&0.0001547&0.0009108\end{bmatrix}

(a) How many variables are in the regression model? (b) If σ^2=50\hat\sigma^2=50, what is the estimated variance of each coefficient? (c) What is the standard error of the intercept?

Show answer

(a) The matrix is 3×33\times3, for β0,β1,β2\beta_0,\beta_1,\beta_2, so there are 2 predictors (plus the intercept).

(b) Var⁡(β^j)=σ^2Cjj\operatorname{Var}(\hat\beta_j)=\hat\sigma^2C_{jj}, using the diagonal:

Var⁡(β^0)=50(0.893758)=44.69,Var⁡(β^1)=50(0.0013329)=0.0666,Var⁡(β^2)=50(0.0009108)=0.0455\operatorname{Var}(\hat\beta_0)=50(0.893758)=44.69,\quad \operatorname{Var}(\hat\beta_1)=50(0.0013329)=0.0666,\quad \operatorname{Var}(\hat\beta_2)=50(0.0009108)=0.0455

(c) se(β^0)=44.69=6.685se(\hat\beta_0)=\sqrt{44.69}=6.685.

Watch out: off-diagonal entries are covariances, Cov⁡(β^i,β^j)=σ2Cij\operatorname{Cov}(\hat\beta_i,\hat\beta_j)=\sigma^2C_{ij}, not variances.

Lecture 04 pp. 17–19, 31 Wire bond pull strength (matrix approach)

n=25n=25, x1x_1 = wire length, x2x_2 = die height, yy = pull strength.

Show the raw data (25 observations)
Obsx1x_1 wire lengthx2x_2 die heightyy pull strength
12509.95
2811024.45
31112031.75
41055035.00
5829525.02
6420016.86
7237514.38
82529.60
9910024.35
10830027.50
11441217.08
121140037.00
131250041.95
14236011.66
15420521.65
16440017.89
172060069.00
18158510.30
191054034.93
201525046.59
211529044.88
221651054.12
231759056.63
24610022.13
25540021.15

From the data,

X′X=[2520682942062396771778294771773531848],X′y=[725.828008.47274811.31]X'X=\begin{bmatrix}25&206&8294\\206&2396&77177\\8294&77177&3531848\end{bmatrix},\quad X'\mathbf y=\begin{bmatrix}725.82\\8008.47\\274811.31\end{bmatrix}

Find the fitted model, then test H0:β2=0H_0:\beta_2=0 at α=0.05\alpha=0.05 given σ^2=MSE=5.2352\hat\sigma^2=MS_E=5.2352 and C22=0.0000015C_{22}=0.0000015.

Show answer β^=(X′X)−1X′y=[0.214653−0.007491−0.000340−0.0074910.001671−0.000019−0.000340−0.0000190.0000015][725.828008.47274811.31]=[2.263792.744270.01253]\hat{\boldsymbol\beta}=(X'X)^{-1}X'\mathbf y=\begin{bmatrix}0.214653&-0.007491&-0.000340\\-0.007491&0.001671&-0.000019\\-0.000340&-0.000019&0.0000015\end{bmatrix}\begin{bmatrix}725.82\\8008.47\\274811.31\end{bmatrix}=\begin{bmatrix}2.26379\\2.74427\\0.01253\end{bmatrix} y^=2.26379+2.74427x1+0.01253x2\hat y=2.26379+2.74427x_1+0.01253x_2 t0=β^2σ^2C22=0.012535.2352×0.0000015=4.477>t0.025,22=2.074t_0=\frac{\hat\beta_2}{\sqrt{\hat\sigma^2C_{22}}}=\frac{0.01253}{\sqrt{5.2352\times0.0000015}}=4.477>t_{0.025,22}=2.074

Reject H0H_0: die height contributes significantly (P-value ≈ 0.0002).

HW2 Q2 (a)(b) Bearing wear data

yy = wear, x1x_1 = oil viscosity, x2x_2 = load, 6 observations (bearingdata.csv):

Obsyy (wear)x1x_1 (viscosity)x2x_2 (load)
12931.6851
223015.5816
317222.01058
49143.01201
511333.01357
612540.01115

(a) Fit y=β0+β1x1+β2x2+εy=\beta_0+\beta_1x_1+\beta_2x_2+\varepsilon. (b) Estimate σ2\sigma^2 and compute each coefficient’s t-statistic (α=0.05\alpha=0.05).

Show answer

(a) y^=383.80−3.638 x1−0.1117 x2\hat y=383.80-3.638\,x_1-0.1117\,x_2

(b) SSE=457.86SSE=457.86, σ^2=MSE=SSE/(n−p)=457.86/3=152.62\hat\sigma^2=MSE=SSE/(n-p)=457.86/3=152.62.

CoefficientEstimatetConclusion (t0.025,3=3.182t_{0.025,3}=3.182)
β0\beta_0383.8010.60significant
β1\beta_1 (viscosity)−3.638−6.42significant
β2\beta_2 (load)−0.1117−2.57not significant

3. ANOVA, R², F-tests and extra sum of squares

Key formulas (nn observations, kk predictors, p=k+1p=k+1)

SST=SSR+SSE,R2=SSRSST,Radj2=1−SSE/(n−p)SST/(n−1)SST=SSR+SSE,\qquad R^2=\frac{SSR}{SST},\qquad R^2_{adj}=1-\frac{SSE/(n-p)}{SST/(n-1)} F0=SSR/kSSE/(n−p)=MSRMSE∼Fk, n−p,reject H0:β1=⋯=βk=0 if F0>Fα,k,n−pF_0=\frac{SSR/k}{SSE/(n-p)}=\frac{MSR}{MSE}\sim F_{k,\,n-p},\qquad \text{reject }H_0:\beta_1=\dots=\beta_k=0\text{ if }F_0>F_{\alpha,k,n-p}

Partial F (extra sum of squares) for adding rr variables:

F0=[SSR(full)−SSR(reduced)]/rMSE(full)∼Fr, n−pfullF_0=\frac{\big[SSR(\text{full})-SSR(\text{reduced})\big]/r}{MSE(\text{full})}\sim F_{r,\,n-p_{full}}

The denominator always uses the full model’s MSE.

Exam Q2 Overall and partial F-tests from sums of squares

A model with 2 regressors is fit to 20 observations; SST=1000SST=1000 and SSR=750SSR=750. (a) R2R^2? (b) Adjusted R2R^2? (c) Compute the F-statistic for significance of regression; what do you conclude at α=0.05\alpha=0.05 and α=0.01\alpha=0.01? (d) Adding a third regressor raises SSRSSR to 785. Did it improve the model?

Show answer

n=20n=20, k=2k=2, p=3p=3, SSE=SST−SSR=250SSE=SST-SSR=250.

(a) R2=750/1000=0.75R^2=750/1000=0.75

(b) Radj2=1−250/171000/19=1−14.7152.63=0.721R^2_{adj}=1-\dfrac{250/17}{1000/19}=1-\dfrac{14.71}{52.63}=0.721

(c)

F0=750/2250/17=37514.71=25.5F_0=\frac{750/2}{250/17}=\frac{375}{14.71}=25.5

F0.05,2,17=3.59F_{0.05,2,17}=3.59 and F0.01,2,17=6.11F_{0.01,2,17}=6.11. F0F_0 exceeds both, so reject H0:β1=β2=0H_0:\beta_1=\beta_2=0 at either level.

(d) New model k=3k=3, p=4p=4: SSRfull=785SSR_{full}=785, SSEfull=215SSE_{full}=215, MSEfull=215/16=13.44MSE_{full}=215/16=13.44.

F0=(785−750)/1215/16=3513.44=2.60<F0.05,1,16=4.49F_0=\frac{(785-750)/1}{215/16}=\frac{35}{13.44}=2.60<F_{0.05,1,16}=4.49

Fail to reject H0:β3=0H_0:\beta_3=0; the third regressor does not significantly improve the model. (R2R^2 rising from 0.75 to 0.785 proves nothing, since R2R^2 never drops when you add a variable.)

Lecture 04 pp. 26–27 ANOVA table for the wire bond data

Show answer
SourceSSdfMSf0f_0
Regression5990.771222995.3856572.17
Error115.1735225.2352
Total6105.944724

f0=572.17>f0.05,2,22=3.44f_0=572.17>f_{0.05,2,22}=3.44 (P-value 1.08×10−191.08\times10^{-19}): reject H0H_0; pull strength is linearly related to wire length, die height, or both.

Lecture 04 pp. 69–71 Partial F-test for adding x3,x4x_3, x_4

Wire bond data: with x1,x2x_1,x_2, SSR(β2,β1∣β0)=5990.8SSR(\beta_2,\beta_1|\beta_0)=5990.8; adding x3,x4x_3,x_4 gives SSR(β4,β3,β2,β1∣β0)=6024.0SSR(\beta_4,\beta_3,\beta_2,\beta_1|\beta_0)=6024.0, full-model MSE=4.1MSE=4.1, n=25n=25. Do x3,x4x_3,x_4 contribute?

Show answer SSR(β4,β3∣β2,β1,β0)=6024.0−5990.8=33.2(2 df)SSR(\beta_4,\beta_3|\beta_2,\beta_1,\beta_0)=6024.0-5990.8=33.2\quad(2\text{ df}) f0=33.2/24.1=4.05>f0.05,2,20=3.49f_0=\frac{33.2/2}{4.1}=4.05>f_{0.05,2,20}=3.49

Reject H0H_0: at least one of x3,x4x_3,x_4 contributes significantly. Denominator df is n−p=25−5=20n-p=25-5=20.

HW2 Q1 Fill in the regression output

Consider the following computer output.

The regression equation is Y = 254 + 2.77 x1 − 3.58 x2

PredictorCoefSE CoefT
Constant253.8104.781?
x12.77380.184615.02
x2−3.57530.1526?

S = 5.05756  R-Sq = ?  R-Sq (adj) = 98.4%

Analysis of Variance

SourceDFSSMSF
Regression22278411392?
Residual error???
Total1423091

(a) Fill in the missing values; (b) conclude on significance of regression; (c) conclude on each regressor.

Show answer

(a) n=15n=15

  • Tconst=253.810/4.781=53.09T_{const}=253.810/4.781=53.09, Tx2=−3.5753/0.1526=−23.43T_{x_2}=-3.5753/0.1526=-23.43
  • Residual DF =14−2=12=14-2=12, SSE=23091−22784=307SSE=23091-22784=307, MSE=307/12=25.58MSE=307/12=25.58 (check: S2=5.057562=25.58S^2=5.05756^2=25.58 ✓)
  • F=11392/25.58=445.3F=11392/25.58=445.3
  • R2=22784/23091=98.7%R^2=22784/23091=98.7\%

The completed output:

PredictorCoefSE CoefT
Constant253.8104.78153.09
x12.77380.184615.02
x2−3.57530.1526−23.43
SourceDFSSMSF
Regression22278411392445.3
Residual error1230725.58
Total1423091

R-Sq = 98.7%

(b) F=445.3≫F0.05,2,12=3.89F=445.3\gg F_{0.05,2,12}=3.89: the regression is highly significant.

(c) Both ∣t∣|t| values are far above t0.025,12=2.179t_{0.025,12}=2.179, so x1x_1 and x2x_2 are both significant.

HW2 Q2 (c)–(g) Bearing data: overall and partial F-tests

Show answer

(c) SST=30245.3SST=30245.3, SSR=29787.5SSR=29787.5, F0=29787.5/2152.62=97.59>F0.05,2,3=9.55F_0=\dfrac{29787.5/2}{152.62}=97.59>F_{0.05,2,3}=9.55, P-value 0.0019: the regression is significant.

(d) At x1=25, x2=1000x_1=25,\ x_2=1000: y^=383.80−3.638(25)−0.1117(1000)=181.2\hat y=383.80-3.638(25)-0.1117(1000)=181.2

(e) With x1x_1 only, SSE=1469.5SSE=1469.5.

F0=1469.5−457.9152.62=6.63<F0.05,1,3=10.13 (P=0.082)F_0=\frac{1469.5-457.9}{152.62}=6.63<F_{0.05,1,3}=10.13\ (P=0.082)

Adding load to a model that already has viscosity is not significant.

(f) With the interaction x1x2x_1x_2: y^=483.97−7.656x1−0.2221x2+0.004087x1x2\hat y=483.97-7.656x_1-0.2221x_2+0.004087x_1x_2, SSE=293.98SSE=293.98, F0=67.92>F0.05,3,2=19.16F_0=67.92>F_{0.05,3,2}=19.16 (P = 0.0145): significant overall.

(g) F0=457.86−293.98293.98/2=1.11<F0.05,1,2=18.51F_0=\dfrac{457.86-293.98}{293.98/2}=1.11<F_{0.05,1,2}=18.51 (P = 0.40): the interaction term is not significant.

HW2 Q3 F from R2R^2, a reduced model, and CpC_p

30 observations, full model with 9 regressors, σ^2=MSE=100\hat\sigma^2=MSE=100, R2=0.92R^2=0.92. (a) F-statistic for significance of regression (α=0.05\alpha=0.05)? (b) A model with 4 of the regressors has SSE=2200SSE=2200; estimate its σ2\sigma^2. Is it better? (c) CpC_p of the reduced model?

Show answer

(a) SSE=MSE(n−p)=100×20=2000SSE=MSE(n-p)=100\times20=2000, SST=SSE/(1−R2)=2000/0.08=25000SST=SSE/(1-R^2)=2000/0.08=25000, SSR=23000SSR=23000.

F0=23000/9100=25.56>F0.05,9,20=2.39F_0=\frac{23000/9}{100}=25.56>F_{0.05,9,20}=2.39

Reject H0H_0: the regression is significant.

(b) σ^reduced2=2200/(30−5)=88<100\hat\sigma^2_{reduced}=2200/(30-5)=88<100. Smaller MSE with fewer variables, so the reduced model is better.

(c) Cp=SSEpσ^full2−n+2p=2200100−30+2(5)=2C_p=\dfrac{SSE_p}{\hat\sigma^2_{full}}-n+2p=\dfrac{2200}{100}-30+2(5)=2. Cp=2≤p=5C_p=2\le p=5, so the reduced model shows little bias; again it is the better model.

4. Logistic regression

Key formulas

p(X)=Pr⁡(Y=1∣X)=eβ0+β1X1+⋯+βpXp1+eβ0+β1X1+⋯+βpXp,log⁡p(X)1−p(X)=β0+β1X1+⋯+βpXpp(X)=\Pr(Y=1\mid X)=\frac{e^{\beta_0+\beta_1X_1+\cdots+\beta_pX_p}}{1+e^{\beta_0+\beta_1X_1+\cdots+\beta_pX_p}},\qquad \log\frac{p(X)}{1-p(X)}=\beta_0+\beta_1X_1+\cdots+\beta_pX_p
  • Interpreting βj\beta_j: holding the others fixed, a one-unit increase in XjX_j raises the log-odds by βj\beta_j (multiplies the odds by eβje^{\beta_j}).
  • p(X)=0.5p(X)=0.5 exactly when the log-odds equal 0.
  • Bernoulli PMF: P(y)=py(1−p)1−yP(y)=p^y(1-p)^{1-y} for y∈{0,1}y\in\{0,1\}.

Exam Q5 Hours studied, GPA, and getting an A

X1X_1 = hours studied, X2X_2 = undergrad GPA, YY = gets an A. Estimates β^0=−6\hat\beta_0=-6, β^1=0.05\hat\beta_1=0.05, β^2=1\hat\beta_2=1. (a) Probability that a student who studies 40 hours with a 3.5 GPA gets an A? (b) How many hours would that student need for a 50% chance?

Show answer

(a) η=−6+0.05(40)+1(3.5)=−0.5\eta=-6+0.05(40)+1(3.5)=-0.5

p^=e−0.51+e−0.5=0.3775\hat p=\frac{e^{-0.5}}{1+e^{-0.5}}=0.3775

(b) p=0.5  ⟺  η=0p=0.5\iff\eta=0: −6+0.05h+3.5=0⇒h=50-6+0.05h+3.5=0\Rightarrow h=50 hours.

Exam Q7 Logistic form when classes are coded {−1,1}\{-1,1\}

With classes coded (0,1)(0,1), Pr⁡(y=1∣X)=eXβ1+eXβ\Pr(y=1|X)=\dfrac{e^{X\beta}}{1+e^{X\beta}} and Pr⁡(y=0∣X)=11+eXβ\Pr(y=0|X)=\dfrac{1}{1+e^{X\beta}}. With classes coded (−1,1)(-1,1), the probability can be written Pr⁡(y=1 or −1∣X)=11+e−y(Xβ)\Pr(y=1\text{ or }-1\mid X)=\dfrac{1}{1+e^{-y(X\beta)}}. Explain why, and write the Bernoulli PMF for y∈{−1,1}y\in\{-1,1\}.

Show answer

Divide top and bottom by eXβe^{X\beta}:

Pr⁡(y=1∣X)=eXβ1+eXβ=11+e−Xβ,Pr⁡(y=−1∣X)=11+eXβ=11+e−(−1)Xβ\Pr(y=1|X)=\frac{e^{X\beta}}{1+e^{X\beta}}=\frac{1}{1+e^{-X\beta}},\qquad \Pr(y=-1|X)=\frac{1}{1+e^{X\beta}}=\frac{1}{1+e^{-(-1)X\beta}}

The two only differ by the sign in front of XβX\beta, which is exactly the value of yy, so both are 11+e−yXβ\dfrac{1}{1+e^{-yX\beta}}.

Bernoulli PMF: for y∈{0,1}y\in\{0,1\}, P(y)=py(1−p)1−yP(y)=p^y(1-p)^{1-y}. For y∈{−1,1}y\in\{-1,1\}, substitute 1+y2∈{0,1}\frac{1+y}{2}\in\{0,1\}:

P(y)=p1+y2(1−p)1−y2P(y)=p^{\frac{1+y}{2}}(1-p)^{\frac{1-y}{2}}

y=1y=1 gives pp and y=−1y=-1 gives 1−p1-p.

Lecture 05 pp. 11–12 Default data

Model 1: Default ~ balance (p. 11)

CoefficientStd. errorz-statisticp-value
Intercept−10.65130.3612−29.5<0.0001
balance0.00550.000224.9<0.0001

Model 2: Default ~ balance + income (thousands) + student (p. 12)

CoefficientStd. errorz-statisticp-value
Intercept−10.86900.4923−22.08<0.0001
balance0.00570.000224.74<0.0001
income0.00300.00820.370.7115
student[Yes]−0.64680.2362−2.740.0062

For comparison: student only (p. 13, confounding)

CoefficientStd. errorz-statisticp-value
Intercept−3.50410.0707−49.55<0.0001
student[Yes]0.40490.11503.520.0004

(1) Using model 1, what is the default probability at a balance of 1,000? (2) Using model 2 (the slide uses 0.00574 for the balance coefficient), what is the default probability for a student and a non-student with balance 1,500 and income 40?

Show answer

(1) p^=e−10.6513+0.0055(1000)1+e−10.6513+0.0055(1000)=0.00576\hat p=\dfrac{e^{-10.6513+0.0055(1000)}}{1+e^{-10.6513+0.0055(1000)}}=0.00576

(2) Student: η=−10.869+0.00574(1500)+0.003(40)−0.6468=−2.786\eta=-10.869+0.00574(1500)+0.003(40)-0.6468=-2.786, p^=0.058\hat p=0.058. Non-student: η=−2.139\eta=-2.139, p^=0.105\hat p=0.105.

At the same balance and income, students are less likely to default (negative coefficient). Lecture 05 p. 13 covers the confounding: on its own, student has a positive coefficient because students carry higher balances on average.

HW3 Q2 Titanic: Bernoulli vs. binomial response format

(a) Fit logistic regression on Pclass, Sex, Age (Bernoulli format). (b) Bin Age into 5-year Age_Range and refit. (c) Group by Pclass, Sex, Age_Range into binomial format (Survived and Died columns) and refit. (d) Are the models adequate?

Show answer
  • (b) differs from (a): Age changes from continuous to binned, so the design matrix changes.
  • (c) has the same coefficients as (b): grouping just pools the Bernoulli rows that share a predictor pattern into binomial counts. The likelihood is the same up to a constant that doesn’t involve the parameters, so the MLEs match; the deviance and its degrees of freedom differ.
  • (d) Compare residual deviance with its df: in binomial format, deviance/df close to 1 and a large goodness-of-fit P-value mean the model is adequate.

5. Bayes classifier, LDA, QDA and KNN

Key formulas

Pr⁡(Y=k∣X=x)=πkfk(x)∑l=1Kπlfl(x),fk(x)=12πσkexp⁡(−(x−μk)22σk2)\Pr(Y=k\mid X=x)=\frac{\pi_kf_k(x)}{\sum_{l=1}^K\pi_lf_l(x)},\qquad f_k(x)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}\sigma_k}\exp\Big(-\frac{(x-\mu_k)^2}{2\sigma_k^2}\Big)
  • LDA: equal variances σ12=⋯=σK2=σ2\sigma_1^2=\dots=\sigma_K^2=\sigma^2; discriminant δk(x)=xμkσ2−μk22σ2+log⁡πk\delta_k(x)=x\dfrac{\mu_k}{\sigma^2}-\dfrac{\mu_k^2}{2\sigma^2}+\log\pi_k is linear in xx.
  • QDA: class-specific variances; the discriminant has an x2x^2 term, so the boundary is quadratic.
  • LDA has higher bias and lower variance; QDA the reverse. Prefer LDA with little data, QDA with lots of data or a non-linear boundary.
  • KNN: small KK gives a flexible boundary (low bias, high variance); large KK gives a nearly linear one.

Exam Q3 LDA or QDA?

(a) If the Bayes decision boundary is linear, do we expect LDA or QDA to do better on the training set? On the test set? (b) If the boundary is non-linear? (c) In general, as nn grows, does QDA’s test accuracy relative to LDA improve, decline or stay the same? Why? (d) True or false: even if the Bayes boundary is linear, QDA will probably give a lower test error than LDA because it is flexible enough to model a linear boundary.

Show answer

(a) Training: QDA (more flexible, fits the noise). Test: LDA (QDA’s extra parameters only add overfitting).

(b) QDA on both training and test sets.

(c) Improves. With more data, the variance from estimating QDA’s extra parameters shrinks, and its lower bias wins out.

(d) False. With a linear boundary, QDA’s extra flexibility doesn’t reduce bias, it only adds variance (especially with small samples), so its test error is usually higher than LDA’s.

Exam Q6 Predicting a dividend with Bayes’ theorem

Predict whether a company issues a dividend this year from last year’s percent profit XX. Companies that issued one had Xˉ=10\bar X=10, those that didn’t had Xˉ=0\bar X=0, both groups have σ^2=36\hat\sigma^2=36, and 80% of companies issued dividends. Assuming XX is normal, find the probability that a company with X=4X=4 issues a dividend.

Show answer

πyes=0.8\pi_{yes}=0.8, πno=0.2\pi_{no}=0.2, μyes=10\mu_{yes}=10, μno=0\mu_{no}=0, σ2=36\sigma^2=36. The factor 12πσ\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}\sigma} is the same for both classes and cancels:

Pr⁡(yes∣X=4)=0.8 e−(4−10)2/720.8 e−(4−10)2/72+0.2 e−(4−0)2/72=0.8(0.6065)0.8(0.6065)+0.2(0.8007)=0.48520.6453=0.752\Pr(\text{yes}\mid X=4)=\frac{0.8\,e^{-(4-10)^2/72}}{0.8\,e^{-(4-10)^2/72}+0.2\,e^{-(4-0)^2/72}}=\frac{0.8(0.6065)}{0.8(0.6065)+0.2(0.8007)}=\frac{0.4852}{0.6453}=0.752

HW3 Q1 Show the QDA Bayes classifier (p = 1) is quadratic

X∣Y=k∼N(μk,σk2)X\mid Y=k\sim N(\mu_k,\sigma_k^2) with class-specific variances. Show that the Bayes classifier is quadratic in xx.

Show answer

The Bayes classifier picks the kk that maximizes πkfk(x)\pi_kf_k(x) (the denominator is shared). Take logs:

log⁡(πkfk(x))=log⁡πk−log⁡σk−12log⁡(2π)−(x−μk)22σk2\log\big(\pi_kf_k(x)\big)=\log\pi_k-\log\sigma_k-\tfrac12\log(2\pi)-\frac{(x-\mu_k)^2}{2\sigma_k^2}

Drop −12log⁡(2π)-\frac12\log(2\pi), which doesn’t depend on kk, and expand the square:

δk(x)=−x22σk2+μkxσk2−μk22σk2−log⁡σk+log⁡πk\delta_k(x)=-\frac{x^2}{2\sigma_k^2}+\frac{\mu_kx}{\sigma_k^2}-\frac{\mu_k^2}{2\sigma_k^2}-\log\sigma_k+\log\pi_k

Because σk\sigma_k differs across classes, the x2x^2 coefficient −12σk2-\frac{1}{2\sigma_k^2} does not cancel between classes, so δk(x)\delta_k(x) and the boundary δk(x)=δl(x)\delta_k(x)=\delta_l(x) are quadratic in xx. With a common σ\sigma, the x2x^2 terms cancel and we get LDA’s linear form.

Lecture 06 p. 11 One-dimensional LDA example

Two normal class densities and the Bayes boundary
Left: the two true densities; the dashed line is the Bayes boundary x = 0. Right: histograms of 20 samples per class; the solid line is the LDA boundary estimated from them. (Lecture 06 p. 11)

μ1=−1.5\mu_1=-1.5, μ2=1.5\mu_2=1.5, π1=π2=0.5\pi_1=\pi_2=0.5, σ2=1\sigma^2=1. Where is the Bayes decision boundary?

Show answer

Set δ1(x)=δ2(x)\delta_1(x)=\delta_2(x). With equal priors the boundary is x=μ1+μ22=0x=\dfrac{\mu_1+\mu_2}{2}=0: assign class 1 if x<0x<0, otherwise class 2. When the parameters are estimated from data, the boundary is the midpoint of the two sample means.

HW1 Q5 KNN by hand

Six training observations:

ObsX1X_1X2X_2X3X_3Y
1030Red
2200Red
3013Red
4012Green
5−101Green
6111Red

Predict Y at X1=X2=X3=0X_1=X_2=X_3=0. (a) Euclidean distances; (b) predictions with K=1K=1 and K=3K=3; (c) if the Bayes boundary is highly non-linear, should KK be large or small?

Show answer

(a) Distances: Obs1 = 3, Obs2 = 2, Obs3 = 10\sqrt{10} = 3.16, Obs4 = 5\sqrt5 = 2.24, Obs5 = 2\sqrt2 = 1.41, Obs6 = 3\sqrt3 = 1.73.

(b) K=1K=1: nearest is Obs5 (Green), so Green. K=3K=3: Obs5 (Green), Obs6 (Red), Obs2 (Red), so Red (2/3).

(c) Small KK. A small KK gives a flexible boundary that can follow a non-linear shape; a large KK pushes the boundary towards linear.

  • #ISE529
  • #Statistics
  • #Regression
  • #Classification
  • #Exam Review