Back to Search Start Over

Testing the prediction error difference between two predictors

Authors :
van de Wiel, M.A.
Berkhof, J.
van Wieringen, W.N.
Stochastics
Neuroscience Campus Amsterdam - integrative Analysis & Modeling
Mathematics
Epidemiology and Data Science
NCA - Integrative Analysis & Modeling
Source :
Biostatistics, 10, 550-560. Oxford University Press, van de Wiel, M A, Berkhof, J & van Wieringen, W N 2009, ' Testing the prediction error difference between two predictors ', Biostatistics, vol. 10, pp. 550-560 . https://doi.org/10.1093/biostatistics/kxp011
Publication Year :
2009

Abstract

We develop an inference framework for the difference in errors between 2 prediction procedures. The 2 procedures may differ in any aspect and possibly utilize different sets of covariates. We apply training and testing on the same data set, which is accommodated by sample splitting. For each split, both procedures predict the response of the same samples, which results in paired residuals to which a signed-rank test is applied. Multiple splits result in multiple p-values. The median p-value and the mean inverse normal transformed p-value are proposed as summary (test) statistics, for which bounds on the overall type I error rate under a variety of assumptions are proven. A simulation study is performed to check type I error control of the least conservative bound. Moreover, it confirms superior power of our method with respect to a one-split approach. Our inference framework is applied to genomic survival data sets to study 2 issues: compare lasso and ridge regression and decide upon use of both methylation and gene expression markers or the latter only. The framework easily accommodates any prediction paradigm and allows comparing any 2, possibly nonmodel-based, prediction procedures.

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
14654644
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
Biostatistics, 10, 550-560. Oxford University Press, van de Wiel, M A, Berkhof, J & van Wieringen, W N 2009, ' Testing the prediction error difference between two predictors ', Biostatistics, vol. 10, pp. 550-560 . https://doi.org/10.1093/biostatistics/kxp011
Accession number :
edsair.dedup.wf.001..6c5cfe0f288a642e4fd99157e6463ba3
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1093/biostatistics/kxp011