IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/biomet/v72y2016i1p272-280.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Subsampling versus bootstrapping in resampling-based model selection for multivariable regression

Author

Listed:
  • Riccardo De Bin
  • Silke Janitza
  • Willi Sauerbrei
  • Anne-Laure Boulesteix

Abstract

type="main" xml:lang="en"> In recent years, increasing attention has been devoted to the problem of the stability of multivariable regression models, understood as the resistance of the model to small changes in the data on which it has been fitted. Resampling techniques, mainly based on the bootstrap, have been developed to address this issue. In particular, the approaches based on the idea of “inclusion frequency” consider the repeated implementation of a variable selection procedure, for example backward elimination, on several bootstrap samples. The analysis of the variables selected in each iteration provides useful information on the model stability and on the variables’ importance. Recent findings, nevertheless, show possible pitfalls in the use of the bootstrap, and alternatives such as subsampling have begun to be taken into consideration in the literature. Using model selection frequencies and variable inclusion frequencies, we empirically compare these two different resampling techniques, investigating the effect of their use in selected classical model selection procedures for multivariable regression. We conduct our investigations by analyzing two real data examples and by performing a simulation study. Our results reveal some advantages in using a subsampling technique rather than the bootstrap in this context.

Suggested Citation

  • Riccardo De Bin & Silke Janitza & Willi Sauerbrei & Anne-Laure Boulesteix, 2016. "Subsampling versus bootstrapping in resampling-based model selection for multivariable regression," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 72(1), pages 272-280, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:biomet:v:72:y:2016:i:1:p:272-280
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Milica Maricic & Jose A. Egea & Veljko Jeremic, 2019. "A Hybrid Enhanced Scatter Search—Composite I-Distance Indicator (eSS-CIDI) Optimization Approach for Determining Weights Within Composite Indicators," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 144(2), pages 497-537, July.
    2. Liu, Zicheng & Lesselier, Dominique & Sudret, Bruno & Wiart, Joe, 2020. "Surrogate modeling based on resampled polynomial chaos expansions," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 202(C).
    3. Chung‐Wei Shen & Yi‐Hau Chen, 2018. "Model selection for semiparametric marginal mean regression accounting for within‐cluster subsampling variability and informative cluster size," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 74(3), pages 934-943, September.
    4. Javier Maldonado & Esther Ruiz, 2021. "Accurate Confidence Regions for Principal Components Factors," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 83(6), pages 1432-1453, December.
    5. De Bin, Riccardo & Boulesteix, Anne-Laure & Sauerbrei, Willi, 2017. "Detection of influential points as a byproduct of resampling-based variable selection procedures," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 19-31.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:biomet:v:72:y:2016:i:1:p:272-280. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0006-341X .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.