LFD Book Forum  

Go Back   LFD Book Forum > Book Feedback - Learning From Data > Chapter 4 - Overfitting

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-19-2014, 11:20 PM
sasin324 sasin324 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 2
Default overfitting and spurious final hypothesis

Based on the book page 124-125
"On a finite data set, the algorithm inadvertently uses some of the degree of freedom to fit the noise, which can result in overfitting and a spurious final hypothesis."
I have some questions based on this sentence:
1. What is spurious hypothesis? How can we identify the spurious hypothesis?
2. Is there any relationship between overfitting phenomenon and the spurious hypothesis?
3. Does spurious hypothesis come from the impact of deterministic noise in data set?

I got stuck for a while to define spurious hypothesis and how to identify it from the model.

Best Regards,
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 05-20-2014, 01:34 PM
yaser's Avatar
yaser yaser is offline
Caltech
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Pasadena, California, USA
Posts: 1,477
Default Re: overfitting and spurious final hypothesis

Quote:
Originally Posted by sasin324 View Post
Based on the book page 124-125
"On a finite data set, the algorithm inadvertently uses some of the degree of freedom to fit the noise, which can result in overfitting and a spurious final hypothesis."
I have some questions based on this sentence:
1. What is spurious hypothesis? How can we identify the spurious hypothesis?
2. Is there any relationship between overfitting phenomenon and the spurious hypothesis?
3. Does spurious hypothesis come from the impact of deterministic noise in data set?

I got stuck for a while to define spurious hypothesis and how to identify it from the model.

Best Regards,
The expression "spurious final hypothesis" is informal. When you fit the noise in sample, whether it is stochastic or deterministic, this takes you away from the desired hypothesis out of sample, since the 'extrapolation' of noise has nothing to do with the desired hypothesis. What you end up with is a spurious (not genuine or authentic) hypothesis.

This is indeed an overfitting phenomenon since fitting the noise is what overfitting is about. Validation can identify overfitting by detecting that the error is getting worse out of sample while we are having a better fit in sample.
__________________
Where everyone thinks alike, no one thinks very much
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05-20-2014, 03:57 PM
sasin324 sasin324 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 2
Default Re: overfitting and spurious final hypothesis

Thanks for your response. This is very clear answer for my questions.
However, I still have some confusing about overfitting and the noise.

Suppose I fit the noise in the sample, Does this noise always introduce additional parameters into my model, i.e. the model have unnecessary parameters to overfit the sample?

Is it possible that an additional parameter in a model comes from a spurious relationship (between parameters) that appears only in a sample by chance, e.g. people who born in December have more chance to have cancer, but doesn't appear in out-of-sample data can lead to overfitting phenomenon?

Could feature selection help mitigate overfitting problem?

Best Regards
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 06-19-2014, 07:37 AM
magdon's Avatar
magdon magdon is offline
RPI
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Troy, NY, USA.
Posts: 595
Default Re: overfitting and spurious final hypothesis

The number of parameters in your model (to describe a hypothesis) is fixed before you see the data. A more complex model with many parameters increases your ability to fit the noise (usually more so than your ability to fit the true information in the data). This leads to the overfitting.

One effect of feature selection is to reduce the number of parameters which usually helps with overfitting.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sasin324 View Post
Thanks for your response. This is very clear answer for my questions.
However, I still have some confusing about overfitting and the noise.

Suppose I fit the noise in the sample, Does this noise always introduce additional parameters into my model, i.e. the model have unnecessary parameters to overfit the sample?

Is it possible that an additional parameter in a model comes from a spurious relationship (between parameters) that appears only in a sample by chance, e.g. people who born in December have more chance to have cancer, but doesn't appear in out-of-sample data can lead to overfitting phenomenon?

Could feature selection help mitigate overfitting problem?

Best Regards
__________________
Have faith in probability
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:08 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
The contents of this forum are to be used ONLY by readers of the Learning From Data book by Yaser S. Abu-Mostafa, Malik Magdon-Ismail, and Hsuan-Tien Lin, and participants in the Learning From Data MOOC by Yaser S. Abu-Mostafa. No part of these contents is to be communicated or made accessible to ANY other person or entity.