How to reduce predictors the right way for a logistic regression model












4












$begingroup$


So I have been reading some books (or parts of them) on modeling (F. Harrell's "Regression Modeling Strategies" among others), since my current situation right now is that I need to do a logistic model based on binary response data. I have both continuous, categorical, and binary data (predictors) in my data set. Basically I have around 100 predictors right now, which obviously is way too many for a good model. Also, many of these predictors are kind of related, since they are often based on the same metric, although a bit different.



Anyhow, what I have been reading, using univariate regression and step-wise techniques is some of the worst things you can do in order to reduce the amount of predictors. I think the LASSO technique is quite okay (if I understood that correctly), but obviously you just can't use that on 100 predictors and think any good will come of that.



So what are my options here ? Do I really just have to sit down, talk to all my supervisors, and smart people at work, and really think about what the top 5 best predictors could/should be (we might be wrong), or which approach(es) should I consider instead ?



And yes, I also know that this topic is heavily discussed (online and in books), but it sometimes seems a bit overwhelming when you are kind of new in this modeling field.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$

















    4












    $begingroup$


    So I have been reading some books (or parts of them) on modeling (F. Harrell's "Regression Modeling Strategies" among others), since my current situation right now is that I need to do a logistic model based on binary response data. I have both continuous, categorical, and binary data (predictors) in my data set. Basically I have around 100 predictors right now, which obviously is way too many for a good model. Also, many of these predictors are kind of related, since they are often based on the same metric, although a bit different.



    Anyhow, what I have been reading, using univariate regression and step-wise techniques is some of the worst things you can do in order to reduce the amount of predictors. I think the LASSO technique is quite okay (if I understood that correctly), but obviously you just can't use that on 100 predictors and think any good will come of that.



    So what are my options here ? Do I really just have to sit down, talk to all my supervisors, and smart people at work, and really think about what the top 5 best predictors could/should be (we might be wrong), or which approach(es) should I consider instead ?



    And yes, I also know that this topic is heavily discussed (online and in books), but it sometimes seems a bit overwhelming when you are kind of new in this modeling field.










    share|cite|improve this question











    $endgroup$















      4












      4








      4





      $begingroup$


      So I have been reading some books (or parts of them) on modeling (F. Harrell's "Regression Modeling Strategies" among others), since my current situation right now is that I need to do a logistic model based on binary response data. I have both continuous, categorical, and binary data (predictors) in my data set. Basically I have around 100 predictors right now, which obviously is way too many for a good model. Also, many of these predictors are kind of related, since they are often based on the same metric, although a bit different.



      Anyhow, what I have been reading, using univariate regression and step-wise techniques is some of the worst things you can do in order to reduce the amount of predictors. I think the LASSO technique is quite okay (if I understood that correctly), but obviously you just can't use that on 100 predictors and think any good will come of that.



      So what are my options here ? Do I really just have to sit down, talk to all my supervisors, and smart people at work, and really think about what the top 5 best predictors could/should be (we might be wrong), or which approach(es) should I consider instead ?



      And yes, I also know that this topic is heavily discussed (online and in books), but it sometimes seems a bit overwhelming when you are kind of new in this modeling field.










      share|cite|improve this question











      $endgroup$




      So I have been reading some books (or parts of them) on modeling (F. Harrell's "Regression Modeling Strategies" among others), since my current situation right now is that I need to do a logistic model based on binary response data. I have both continuous, categorical, and binary data (predictors) in my data set. Basically I have around 100 predictors right now, which obviously is way too many for a good model. Also, many of these predictors are kind of related, since they are often based on the same metric, although a bit different.



      Anyhow, what I have been reading, using univariate regression and step-wise techniques is some of the worst things you can do in order to reduce the amount of predictors. I think the LASSO technique is quite okay (if I understood that correctly), but obviously you just can't use that on 100 predictors and think any good will come of that.



      So what are my options here ? Do I really just have to sit down, talk to all my supervisors, and smart people at work, and really think about what the top 5 best predictors could/should be (we might be wrong), or which approach(es) should I consider instead ?



      And yes, I also know that this topic is heavily discussed (online and in books), but it sometimes seems a bit overwhelming when you are kind of new in this modeling field.







      logistic predictive-models modeling predictor






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited 4 hours ago









      Ben Bolker

      23.4k16393




      23.4k16393










      asked 4 hours ago









      Denver DangDenver Dang

      226110




      226110






















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          3












          $begingroup$

          +1 for "sometimes seems a bit overwhelming". It really depends (as Harrell clearly states; see the section at the end of Chapter 4) whether you want to do





          • confirmatory analysis ($to$ reduce your predictor complexity to a reasonable level without looking at the responses, by PCA or subject-area considerations or ...)


          • predictive analysis ($to$ use appropriate penalization methods). Lasso could very well work OK with 100 predictors, if you have a reasonably large sample. Feature selection will be unstable, but that's OK if all you care about is prediction. I have a personal preference for ridge-like approaches that don't technically "select features" (because they never reduce any parameter to exactly zero), but whatever works ...



            You'll have to use cross-validation to choose the degree of penalization, which will destroy your ability to do inference (construct confidence intervals on predictions) unless you use cutting-edge high-dimensional inference methods (e.g. Dezeure et al 2015; I have not tried these approaches but they seem sensible ...)




          • exploratory analysis: have fun, be transparent and honest, don't quote any p-values.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$





















            0












            $begingroup$

            There are many different approaches. What I would recommend is trying some simple ones, in the following order:




            • L1 regularization (with increasing penalty; the larger the regularization coefficient, the more features will be eliminated)

            • Recursive Feature Elimination (https://scikit-learn.org/stable/modules/feature_selection.html#recursive-feature-elimination) -- removes features incrementally by eliminating the features associated with the smallest model coefficients (assuming that those are the least important once; obviously, it's very crucial here to normalize the input features)

            • Sequential Feature Selection (http://rasbt.github.io/mlxtend/user_guide/feature_selection/SequentialFeatureSelector/) -- removes features based on how important they are for predictive performance






            share|cite|improve this answer








            New contributor




            resnet is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
            Check out our Code of Conduct.






            $endgroup$













              Your Answer





              StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
              return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
              StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
              StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
              });
              });
              }, "mathjax-editing");

              StackExchange.ready(function() {
              var channelOptions = {
              tags: "".split(" "),
              id: "65"
              };
              initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

              StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
              // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
              if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
              StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
              createEditor();
              });
              }
              else {
              createEditor();
              }
              });

              function createEditor() {
              StackExchange.prepareEditor({
              heartbeatType: 'answer',
              autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
              convertImagesToLinks: false,
              noModals: true,
              showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
              reputationToPostImages: null,
              bindNavPrevention: true,
              postfix: "",
              imageUploader: {
              brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
              contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
              allowUrls: true
              },
              onDemand: true,
              discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
              ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
              });


              }
              });














              draft saved

              draft discarded


















              StackExchange.ready(
              function () {
              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstats.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f398638%2fhow-to-reduce-predictors-the-right-way-for-a-logistic-regression-model%23new-answer', 'question_page');
              }
              );

              Post as a guest















              Required, but never shown

























              2 Answers
              2






              active

              oldest

              votes








              2 Answers
              2






              active

              oldest

              votes









              active

              oldest

              votes






              active

              oldest

              votes









              3












              $begingroup$

              +1 for "sometimes seems a bit overwhelming". It really depends (as Harrell clearly states; see the section at the end of Chapter 4) whether you want to do





              • confirmatory analysis ($to$ reduce your predictor complexity to a reasonable level without looking at the responses, by PCA or subject-area considerations or ...)


              • predictive analysis ($to$ use appropriate penalization methods). Lasso could very well work OK with 100 predictors, if you have a reasonably large sample. Feature selection will be unstable, but that's OK if all you care about is prediction. I have a personal preference for ridge-like approaches that don't technically "select features" (because they never reduce any parameter to exactly zero), but whatever works ...



                You'll have to use cross-validation to choose the degree of penalization, which will destroy your ability to do inference (construct confidence intervals on predictions) unless you use cutting-edge high-dimensional inference methods (e.g. Dezeure et al 2015; I have not tried these approaches but they seem sensible ...)




              • exploratory analysis: have fun, be transparent and honest, don't quote any p-values.






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$


















                3












                $begingroup$

                +1 for "sometimes seems a bit overwhelming". It really depends (as Harrell clearly states; see the section at the end of Chapter 4) whether you want to do





                • confirmatory analysis ($to$ reduce your predictor complexity to a reasonable level without looking at the responses, by PCA or subject-area considerations or ...)


                • predictive analysis ($to$ use appropriate penalization methods). Lasso could very well work OK with 100 predictors, if you have a reasonably large sample. Feature selection will be unstable, but that's OK if all you care about is prediction. I have a personal preference for ridge-like approaches that don't technically "select features" (because they never reduce any parameter to exactly zero), but whatever works ...



                  You'll have to use cross-validation to choose the degree of penalization, which will destroy your ability to do inference (construct confidence intervals on predictions) unless you use cutting-edge high-dimensional inference methods (e.g. Dezeure et al 2015; I have not tried these approaches but they seem sensible ...)




                • exploratory analysis: have fun, be transparent and honest, don't quote any p-values.






                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$
















                  3












                  3








                  3





                  $begingroup$

                  +1 for "sometimes seems a bit overwhelming". It really depends (as Harrell clearly states; see the section at the end of Chapter 4) whether you want to do





                  • confirmatory analysis ($to$ reduce your predictor complexity to a reasonable level without looking at the responses, by PCA or subject-area considerations or ...)


                  • predictive analysis ($to$ use appropriate penalization methods). Lasso could very well work OK with 100 predictors, if you have a reasonably large sample. Feature selection will be unstable, but that's OK if all you care about is prediction. I have a personal preference for ridge-like approaches that don't technically "select features" (because they never reduce any parameter to exactly zero), but whatever works ...



                    You'll have to use cross-validation to choose the degree of penalization, which will destroy your ability to do inference (construct confidence intervals on predictions) unless you use cutting-edge high-dimensional inference methods (e.g. Dezeure et al 2015; I have not tried these approaches but they seem sensible ...)




                  • exploratory analysis: have fun, be transparent and honest, don't quote any p-values.






                  share|cite|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$



                  +1 for "sometimes seems a bit overwhelming". It really depends (as Harrell clearly states; see the section at the end of Chapter 4) whether you want to do





                  • confirmatory analysis ($to$ reduce your predictor complexity to a reasonable level without looking at the responses, by PCA or subject-area considerations or ...)


                  • predictive analysis ($to$ use appropriate penalization methods). Lasso could very well work OK with 100 predictors, if you have a reasonably large sample. Feature selection will be unstable, but that's OK if all you care about is prediction. I have a personal preference for ridge-like approaches that don't technically "select features" (because they never reduce any parameter to exactly zero), but whatever works ...



                    You'll have to use cross-validation to choose the degree of penalization, which will destroy your ability to do inference (construct confidence intervals on predictions) unless you use cutting-edge high-dimensional inference methods (e.g. Dezeure et al 2015; I have not tried these approaches but they seem sensible ...)




                  • exploratory analysis: have fun, be transparent and honest, don't quote any p-values.







                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered 4 hours ago









                  Ben BolkerBen Bolker

                  23.4k16393




                  23.4k16393

























                      0












                      $begingroup$

                      There are many different approaches. What I would recommend is trying some simple ones, in the following order:




                      • L1 regularization (with increasing penalty; the larger the regularization coefficient, the more features will be eliminated)

                      • Recursive Feature Elimination (https://scikit-learn.org/stable/modules/feature_selection.html#recursive-feature-elimination) -- removes features incrementally by eliminating the features associated with the smallest model coefficients (assuming that those are the least important once; obviously, it's very crucial here to normalize the input features)

                      • Sequential Feature Selection (http://rasbt.github.io/mlxtend/user_guide/feature_selection/SequentialFeatureSelector/) -- removes features based on how important they are for predictive performance






                      share|cite|improve this answer








                      New contributor




                      resnet is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.






                      $endgroup$


















                        0












                        $begingroup$

                        There are many different approaches. What I would recommend is trying some simple ones, in the following order:




                        • L1 regularization (with increasing penalty; the larger the regularization coefficient, the more features will be eliminated)

                        • Recursive Feature Elimination (https://scikit-learn.org/stable/modules/feature_selection.html#recursive-feature-elimination) -- removes features incrementally by eliminating the features associated with the smallest model coefficients (assuming that those are the least important once; obviously, it's very crucial here to normalize the input features)

                        • Sequential Feature Selection (http://rasbt.github.io/mlxtend/user_guide/feature_selection/SequentialFeatureSelector/) -- removes features based on how important they are for predictive performance






                        share|cite|improve this answer








                        New contributor




                        resnet is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                        Check out our Code of Conduct.






                        $endgroup$
















                          0












                          0








                          0





                          $begingroup$

                          There are many different approaches. What I would recommend is trying some simple ones, in the following order:




                          • L1 regularization (with increasing penalty; the larger the regularization coefficient, the more features will be eliminated)

                          • Recursive Feature Elimination (https://scikit-learn.org/stable/modules/feature_selection.html#recursive-feature-elimination) -- removes features incrementally by eliminating the features associated with the smallest model coefficients (assuming that those are the least important once; obviously, it's very crucial here to normalize the input features)

                          • Sequential Feature Selection (http://rasbt.github.io/mlxtend/user_guide/feature_selection/SequentialFeatureSelector/) -- removes features based on how important they are for predictive performance






                          share|cite|improve this answer








                          New contributor




                          resnet is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                          Check out our Code of Conduct.






                          $endgroup$



                          There are many different approaches. What I would recommend is trying some simple ones, in the following order:




                          • L1 regularization (with increasing penalty; the larger the regularization coefficient, the more features will be eliminated)

                          • Recursive Feature Elimination (https://scikit-learn.org/stable/modules/feature_selection.html#recursive-feature-elimination) -- removes features incrementally by eliminating the features associated with the smallest model coefficients (assuming that those are the least important once; obviously, it's very crucial here to normalize the input features)

                          • Sequential Feature Selection (http://rasbt.github.io/mlxtend/user_guide/feature_selection/SequentialFeatureSelector/) -- removes features based on how important they are for predictive performance







                          share|cite|improve this answer








                          New contributor




                          resnet is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                          Check out our Code of Conduct.









                          share|cite|improve this answer



                          share|cite|improve this answer






                          New contributor




                          resnet is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                          Check out our Code of Conduct.









                          answered 4 hours ago









                          resnetresnet

                          1595




                          1595




                          New contributor




                          resnet is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                          Check out our Code of Conduct.





                          New contributor





                          resnet is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                          Check out our Code of Conduct.






                          resnet is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                          Check out our Code of Conduct.






























                              draft saved

                              draft discarded




















































                              Thanks for contributing an answer to Cross Validated!


                              • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                              But avoid



                              • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                              • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                              Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                              To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                              draft saved


                              draft discarded














                              StackExchange.ready(
                              function () {
                              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstats.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f398638%2fhow-to-reduce-predictors-the-right-way-for-a-logistic-regression-model%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                              }
                              );

                              Post as a guest















                              Required, but never shown





















































                              Required, but never shown














                              Required, but never shown












                              Required, but never shown







                              Required, but never shown

































                              Required, but never shown














                              Required, but never shown












                              Required, but never shown







                              Required, but never shown







                              Popular posts from this blog

                              CARDNET

                              Boot-repair Failure: Unable to locate package grub-common:i386

                              濃尾地震