IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/biomet/v101y2014i4p771-784..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

When does more regularization imply fewer degrees of freedom? Sufficient conditions and counterexamples

Author

Listed:
  • S. Kaufman
  • S. Rosset

Abstract

Regularization aims to improve prediction performance by trading an increase in training error for better agreement between training and prediction errors, which is often captured through decreased degrees of freedom. In this paper we give examples which show that regularization can increase the degrees of freedom in common models, including the lasso and ridge regression. In such situations, both training error and degrees of freedom increase, making the regularization inherently without merit. Two important scenarios are described where the expected reduction in degrees of freedom is guaranteed: all symmetric linear smoothers and convex constrained linear regression models like ridge regression and the lasso, when compared to unconstrained linear regression.

Suggested Citation

  • S. Kaufman & S. Rosset, 2014. "When does more regularization imply fewer degrees of freedom? Sufficient conditions and counterexamples," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 101(4), pages 771-784.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:biomet:v:101:y:2014:i:4:p:771-784.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/biomet/asu034
    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. Ueki, Masao, 2021. "Testing conditional mean through regression model sequence using Yanai’s generalized coefficient of determination," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    2. Philip T. Reiss & Lei Huang & Pei‐Shien Wu & Huaihou Chen & Stan Colcombe, 2017. "Pointwise influence matrices for functional‐response regression," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 73(4), pages 1092-1101, December.

    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:oup:biomet:v:101:y:2014:i:4:p:771-784.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/biomet .

    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.