F test for R^2 when comparing two models

  • Thread starter Thread starter emmasaunders12
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Models Test
Click For Summary
When comparing two models using R squared, the significance of this value can be tested with an F test, but complications arise when models operate in different dimensional domains, such as PCA. The challenge lies in determining the correct degrees of freedom for the model in the PCA domain. It is suggested that using alternative metrics like AIC or BIC may provide a better comparison, especially when models have different numbers of parameters. A formula adjustment for the F test can be applied if the models differ in parameters, but the appropriateness of this approach is questioned. Ultimately, focusing on how well each model predicts new data is crucial for evaluation.
emmasaunders12
Messages
43
Reaction score
0
Hi all

I am comparing the performance of two models and have calculated the coefficient of determination R squared for each. I would like however to test the significance of this value.

The F test however requires that the number of degrees of freedom for each model. The trouble is one model operates in a lower dimensional domain, by projecting the data into PCA domain. Therefore I am not sure on the degrees of freedom for this model as I have degrees of freedom in the PCA domain and then a projection operator to obtain my values of the dependent variable.

Has anyone any ideas how to proceed, in this case, or perhaps the suggestion for an alternative test statistic.

Thanks

Emma
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What are your models, precisely? It seems to me that there is almost certainly a better way to compare them than by R2. By the sounds of it, the models have different numbers of parameters, in which case comparing R2 values is completely inappropriate. My first thought when I hear "model comparison" is something like the AIC or BIC, but this will depend on what you're interested in (e.g. prediction, model fit, parsimony).
 
Hi number 9, can I simply alter the degrees of freedom for comparison:

I have found this relationship:

If the models have di erent numbers of parameters, the formula becomes:
F =[(SS1-SS2)/(df1df2)]/SS2-df2

I'm interested how well each model performs, that is how well it fits to new data, outside of a training stage, does that count as prediction?

Thanks

Emma
 
The standard _A " operator" maps a Null Hypothesis Ho into a decision set { Do not reject:=1 and reject :=0}. In this sense ( HA)_A , makes no sense. Since H0, HA aren't exhaustive, can we find an alternative operator, _A' , so that ( H_A)_A' makes sense? Isn't Pearson Neyman related to this? Hope I'm making sense. Edit: I was motivated by a superficial similarity of the idea with double transposition of matrices M, with ## (M^{T})^{T}=M##, and just wanted to see if it made sense to talk...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
863
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
9K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K