Regression SS in multiple linear regression

Click For Summary
In multiple linear regression, the regression sum of squares (SSR) is still equal to ∑ (Y_i hat - Y bar)^2, but it is expressed in matrix form for clarity and to leverage linear algebra. The matrix approach simplifies the derivation of normal equations and facilitates hypothesis testing through established theorems related to multivariate normal distributions. This method also helps explain concepts like the residuals summing to zero and the degrees of freedom associated with different quantities. The transition to matrix notation is not merely for complexity; it provides a more robust framework for understanding multiple regression. Understanding these concepts is crucial for effective application and interpretation in statistical analysis.
kingwinner
Messages
1,266
Reaction score
0
In MULTIPLE linear regression, is it still true that the regression sum of squares is equal to
∑ (Y_i hat -Y bar)^2 ?

My textbook defines regression SS in the chapters for simple linear regression as ∑ (Y_i hat -Y bar)^2, and then in the chapters for multiple linear regression, the regression SS is defined in MATRIX form, and it did not say anywhere whether it is still equal to ∑ (Y_i hat -Y bar)^2 or not, so I am confused...

If it is still equal to ∑ (Y_i hat -Y bar)^2 in MULTIPLE linear regression (this is such a simple formula), what is the whole point of expressing the regression SS in terms of matrices in mutliple linear regression? I don't see any point of doing so when the formula ∑ (Y_i hat -Y bar)^2 is already so simple. There is no need to develop additional headaches...

Thanks for explaining!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think you have notation (and/or terms) confused. In simple linear regression

<br /> \begin{align*}<br /> SSTO &amp; = \sum(Y_i - \bar Y)^2 \\<br /> SSE &amp; = \sum (Y_i - \hat Y_i)^2 \\<br /> SSR &amp; = SSTO - SSE = \sum (\hat Y_i - \bar Y)^2<br /> \end{align*}<br />

In multiple linear regression, with matrix notation,

<br /> \begin{align*}<br /> SSTO &amp; = \mathbf{Y}&#039;\mathbf{Y} - n \bar{Y}^2 \quad(=\sum (Y_i - \bar Y)^2)\\<br /> SSE &amp; = \hat{e}&#039; \hat{e} = \mathbf{Y}&#039; \mathbf{Y} - \hat{\mathbf{\beta}}&#039; \mathbf{X}&#039; \mathbf{Y} \quad (=\sum (Y_i - \hat Y_i)^2) \\<br /> SSR &amp; = SSTO - SSE = \hat{\mathbf{\beta}}&#039; \mathbf{X}&#039; \mathbf{Y} - n \bar{Y}^2<br /> \end{align*}<br />

The matrix approach isn't here simply to cause confusion: in multiple linear regression the "nice" approach of drawing pictures to represent things breaks down. However, a little linear algebra can be used to describe exactly why the residuals sum to zero, why the different quantities have different degrees of freedom, as well as provide convenient ways to generate tests (there are many theorems that describe the probability distribution of different quadratic forms of multivariate normal distributions: using matrices in multiple regression allow these theorems to be used to develop hypothesis tests.)

On a more basic level: imagine trying to derive the normal equations (to estimate the regression coefficients) by algebra rather than via the matrix approach. It isn't fun.

As one more: example:

The fitted values in multiple regression can be written as

<br /> \hat Y = X \left(X&#039;X\right)^{-1} X&#039; Y \equiv P_V Y<br />

where P_V = X \left(X&#039;X\right)^{-1} X&#039; is a projection matrix onto the space spanned by the columns of X.

The residuals are

<br /> \hat e &amp; = Y - \hat Y = \left(I - X \left(X&#039;X\right)^{-1} X&#039;\right) Y \equiv P_{\hat V} Y<br />

where P_{\hat V} = I - X \left(X&#039;X\right)^{-1} X&#039; is the projection onto the space orthogonal to the column space of X.

Now

<br /> \hat e&#039; \hat Y = Y&#039; P_{\hat V} \left(I - P_{\hat V}\right) Y = Y&#039; \left(P_{\hat V} - P_{\hat V}^2\right) Y = Y&#039; \left(P_{\hat V} - P_{\hat V}\right) Y = 0<br />

or, in short,

<br /> \sum \hat{e}_i \hat{y}_i = 0<br />

just as in linear regression.
 
Do you know how to prove that
SSE = Syy – Sxy2/Sxx = Syy - β1hat2 * Sxx
 
First trick I learned this one a long time ago and have used it to entertain and amuse young kids. Ask your friend to write down a three-digit number without showing it to you. Then ask him or her to rearrange the digits to form a new three-digit number. After that, write whichever is the larger number above the other number, and then subtract the smaller from the larger, making sure that you don't see any of the numbers. Then ask the young "victim" to tell you any two of the digits of the...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 64 ·
3
Replies
64
Views
5K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K