One can perform glm model fit with logistic link function for response from binomial family and then can apply step function to extract the best subset of explanatory features in terms of information criterion such as AIC or BIC.
Have anyone performed such procedure for an output model from cv.glmnetfunction or glmnet from glmnet package? Can you suggest how one can reproduce the same methodology used on regular glm model and cv.glmnet model?
This below doesn't look like it would work:
modelAIC <-step( object= model$glmnet.fit, direction = "backward")
Related
The documentation for the multinom() function from the nnet package in R says that it "[f]its multinomial log-linear models via neural networks" and that "[t]he response should be a factor or a matrix with K columns, which will be interpreted as counts for each of K classes." Even when I go to add a tag for nnet on this question, the description says that it is software for fitting "multinomial log-linear models."
Granting that statistics has wildly inconsistent jargon that is rarely operationally defined by whoever is using it, the documentation for the function even mentions having a count response and so seems to indicate that this function is designed to model count data. Yet virtually every resource I've seen treats it exclusively as if it were fitting a multinomial logistic regression. In short, everyone interprets the results in terms of logged odds relative to the reference (as in logistic regression), not in terms of logged expected count (as in what is typically referred to as a log-linear model).
Can someone clarify what this function is actually doing and what the fitted coefficients actually mean?
nnet::multinom is fitting a multinomial logistic regression as I understand...
If you check the source code of the package, https://github.com/cran/nnet/blob/master/R/multinom.R and https://github.com/cran/nnet/blob/master/R/nnet.R, you will see that the multinom function is indeed using counts (which is a common thing to use as input for a multinomial regression model, see also the MGLM or mclogit package e.g.), and that it is fitting the multinomial regression model using a softmax transform to go from predictions on the additive log-ratio scale to predicted probabilities. The softmax transform is indeed the inverse link scale of a multinomial regression model. The way the multinom model predictions are obtained, cf.predictions from nnet::multinom, is also exactly as you would expect for a multinomial regression model (using an additive log-ratio scale parameterization, i.e. using one outcome category as a baseline).
That is, the coefficients predict the logged odds relative to the reference baseline category (i.e. it is doing a logistic regression), not the logged expected counts (like a log-linear model).
This is shown by the fact that model predictions are calculated as
fit <- nnet::multinom(...)
X <- model.matrix(fit) # covariate matrix / design matrix
betahat <- t(rbind(0, coef(fit))) # model coefficients, with expicit zero row added for reference category & transposed
preds <- mclustAddons::softmax(X %*% betahat)
Furthermore, I verified that the vcov matrix returned by nnet::multinom matches that when I use the formula for the vcov matrix of a multinomial regression model, Faster way to calculate the Hessian / Fisher Information Matrix of a nnet::multinom multinomial regression in R using Rcpp & Kronecker products.
Is it not the case that a multinomial regression model can always be reformulated as a Poisson loglinear model (i.e. as a Poisson GLM) using the Poisson trick (glmnet e.g. uses the Poisson trick to fit multinomial regression models as a Poisson GLM)?
I am trying to use a generalized least square model (gls in R) on my panel data to deal with autocorrelation problem.
I do not want to have any lags for any variables.
I am trying to use Durbin-Watson test (dwtest in R) to check the autocorrelation problem from my generalized least square model (gls).
However, I find that the dwtest is not applicable over gls function while it is applicable to other functions such as lm.
Is there a way to check the autocorrelation problem from my gls model?
Durbin-Watson test is designed to check for presence of autocorrelation in standard least-squares models (such as one fitted by lm). If autocorrelation is detected, one can then capture it explicitly in the model using, for example, generalized least squares (gls in R). My understanding is that Durbin-Watson is not appropriate to then test for "goodness of fit" in the resulting models, as gls residuals may no longer follow the same distribution as residuals from the standard lm model. (Somebody with deeper knowledge of statistics should correct me, if I'm wrong).
With that said, function durbinWatsonTest from the car package will accept arbitrary residuals and return the associated test statistic. You can therefore do something like this:
v <- gls( ... )$residuals
attr(v,"std") <- NULL # get rid of the additional attribute
car::durbinWatsonTest( v )
Note that durbinWatsonTest will compute p-values only for lm models (likely due to the considerations described above), but you can estimate them empirically by permuting your data / residuals.
I fit a given data using Cox model via glmnet R package and my
little R example is:
library(fastcox);data(FHT);attach(FHT) #
library(glmnet)
library(survival)
fit = glmnet(x,Surv(y,status),family="cox",alpha=1)
From the help document, we know glmnet fits penalized models like
-loglik/nobs + λ*penalty
i.e., objective function = loss function + penalty function.
I want to fetch -loglik/nobs (loss function value,
the negative partial log-likelihood of the fitted model
or two term
Taylor series expansions of the log likelihoods) from the fit object.
Any idea? Tks
BTW, we also tried
fit0 = glmnet(x,Surv(y,status),family="cox",alpha=1,lambda=0)
according to -loglik/nobs + λ*penalty, but it shows errors.
One can perform regular ordinary generalized linear model in R using glm function that has it's own method for summary function and one can summary of the model in which output there are p-values for each variable. Depending on those p-values one can say which variables are statistically significance or not under specific confidence level.
My question is. Is there is the same functionality for cv.glmnet function from glmnet package? I know that after computation I can receive a table with coefficients coef(model, s="lambda.min") where some of them are not zero. So I assume (maybe wrongly) that those non-zero are statistically significance. Am I right? Is there any method that provides p-values or confidence intervals for those coefficients?
I would like to compare two models using f-test fitting my data. For each model I performed Monte-Carlo simulation that provided statistical estimation for each model parameter and rms fit error. I would like to use f-test in R to determine which model is preferable.
Best to use the anova function.
anova(modle1, model2)
This preforms a model f test.