[R] AIC and goodness of prediction - was: Re: goodness of "prediction" using a model (lm, glm, gam, brt,

[Corrado]

Dear Kingsford,

I apologise for breaking the thread, but I thought there were some more people 
who would be interested.

What you propose is what I am using at the moment: the sum of the squares of 
the residuals, plus  variance / stdev. I am not really satisfied. I have also 
tried using R2, and it works well .... but some people go a bit wild eyed when 
they see a negative R2 (which is perfectly reasonable when you use R2 as a 
measure of goodness of fit on prediction on a dataset different from the 
training set).

I was then wondering whether it would make sense to use AIC: the K in the 
formula will still be the number of parameters of the trained model, the "sum 
of square residuals" would be the (predicted - observed)^2, N would be the 
number of samples in the test dataset. I think it should work well.

What do you / other R list members think?

Regards

On Thursday 03 September 2009 15:06:14 Kingsford Jones wrote:
> There are many ways to measure prediction quality, and what you choose
> depends on the data and your goals.  A common measure for a
> quantitative response is mean squared error (i.e. 1/n * sum((observed
> - predicted)^2)) which incorporates bias and variance.  Common terms
> for what you are looking for are "test error" and "generalization
> error".
>
>
> hth,
> Kingsford
>
> On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 11:56 PM, Corrado<ct529 at york.ac.uk> wrote:
> > Dear R-friends,
> >
> > How do you test the goodness of prediction of a model, when you predict
> > on a set of data DIFFERENT from the training set?
> >
> > I explain myself: you train your model M (e.g. glm,gam,regression tree,
> > brt) on a set of data A with a response variable Y. You then predict the
> > value of that same response variable Y on a different set of data B (e.g.
> > predict.glm, predict.gam and so on). Dataset A and dataset B are
> > different in the sense that they contain the same variable, for example
> > temperature, measured in different sites, or on a different interval
> > (e.g. B is a subinterval of A for interpolation, or a different interval
> > for extrapolation). If you have the measured values for Y on the new
> > interval, i.e. B, how do you measure how good is the prediction, that is
> > how well model fits the Y on B (that is, how well does it predict)?
> >
> > In other words:
> >
> > Y~T,data=A for training
> > Y~T,data=B for predicting
> >
> > I have devised a couple of method based around 1) standard deviation 2)
> > R^2, but I am unhappy with them.
> >
> > Regards
> > --
> > Corrado Topi
> >
> > Global Climate Change & Biodiversity Indicators
> > Area 18,Department of Biology
> > University of York, York, YO10 5YW, UK
> > Phone: + 44 (0) 1904 328645, E-mail: ct529 at york.ac.uk
> >
> > ______________________________________________
> > R-help at r-project.org mailing list
> > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
> > PLEASE do read the posting guide
> > http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented,
> > minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.



-- 
Corrado Topi

Global Climate Change & Biodiversity Indicators
Area 18,Department of Biology
University of York, York, YO10 5YW, UK
Phone: + 44 (0) 1904 328645, E-mail: ct529 at york.ac.uk