A Cluster Elastic Net for Multivariate Regression

We propose a method for estimating coefficients in multivariate regression when there is a clustering structure to the response variables. The proposed method includes a fusion penalty, to shrink the difference in fitted values from responses in the same cluster, and an L1 penalty for simultaneous variable selection and estimation. The method can be used when the grouping structure of the response variables is known or unknown. When the clustering structure is unknown the method will simultaneously estimate the clusters of the response and the regression coefficients. Theoretical results are presented for the penalized least squares case, including asymptotic results allowing for p >> n. We extend our method to the setting where the responses are binomial variables. We propose a coordinate descent algorithm for both the normal and binomial likelihood, which can easily be extended to other generalized linear model (GLM) settings. Simulations and data examples from business operations and genomics are presented to show the merits of both the least squares and binomial methods.Comment: 37 Pages, 11 Figure

Bayesian correction for covariate measurement error: a frequentist evaluation and comparison with regression calibration

Bayesian approaches for handling covariate measurement error are well established, and yet arguably are still relatively little used by researchers. For some this is likely due to unfamiliarity or disagreement with the Bayesian inferential paradigm. For others a contributory factor is the inability of standard statistical packages to perform such Bayesian analyses. In this paper we first give an overview of the Bayesian approach to handling covariate measurement error, and contrast it with regression calibration (RC), arguably the most commonly adopted approach. We then argue why the Bayesian approach has a number of statistical advantages compared to RC, and demonstrate that implementing the Bayesian approach is usually quite feasible for the analyst. Next we describe the closely related maximum likelihood and multiple imputation approaches, and explain why we believe the Bayesian approach to generally be preferable. We then empirically compare the frequentist properties of RC and the Bayesian approach through simulation studies. The flexibility of the Bayesian approach to handle both measurement error and missing data is then illustrated through an analysis of data from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey