Re: VIF

2000-05-31 Thread jineshwar singh


--- "Donald F. Burrill" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
 On 31 May 2000, Vmcw wrote:
 VIF=10 is based on empirical data. 
  It is 10. I hope, you are talking about Variance
 Inflation Factor. 
  More than 10 indicates severe multicollinearity.
 
 Thus spake Jin Singh.  And someone else (was it Dave
 Heiser?) retorted, 
 sensibly I thought,
 
  And where does this magic number come from? :)
 
 To which Tom in PA replied (possibly
 tongue-in-cheek?), 
 
  Neter, Wasserman, Nachtsheim, and Kutner, of
 course!  (or is it Wasserman,
  Kutner, Neter, and Nachtsheim or one of the other
 22 permutations?).
 
 I've heard of a Wasserman (or Wassermann?) test, but
 didn't think it had 
 to do with VIF.  Dunno about all those other blokes.
  But apart from 
 argument by Appeal to Irrelevant Authority at
 HeadQuarters, was there 
 actually some _reasoning_ underlying the selection
 of VIF = 10, or was 
 it just someone's arbitrary guess (like the 10
 subjects per variable one 
 is supposed to have before one dares essay a factor
 analysis)?
   -- Don.
 


  Donald F. Burrill
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  348 Hyde Hall, Plymouth State College, 
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  MSC #29, Plymouth, NH 03264
 603-535-2597
  184 Nashua Road, Bedford, NH 03110 
 603-471-7128  
 
 
 

===
 This list is open to everyone.  Occasionally, less
 thoughtful
 people send inappropriate messages.  Please DO NOT
 COMPLAIN TO
 THE POSTMASTER about these messages because the
 postmaster has no
 way of controlling them, and excessive complaints
 will result in
 termination of the list.
 
 For information about this list, including
 information about the
 problem of inappropriate messages and information
 about how to
 unsubscribe, please see the web page at
 http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/

===
 
 
 


=
J. Singh
I.D.S
George brown College
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.gbrownc.on.ca/~jsingh

__
Do You Yahoo!?
Send instant messages  get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com/


===
This list is open to everyone.  Occasionally, less thoughtful
people send inappropriate messages.  Please DO NOT COMPLAIN TO
THE POSTMASTER about these messages because the postmaster has no
way of controlling them, and excessive complaints will result in
termination of the list.

For information about this list, including information about the
problem of inappropriate messages and information about how to
unsubscribe, please see the web page at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
===



Re: VIF

2000-05-31 Thread jineshwar singh


--- "T.S. Lim"
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 In article 000701bfca86$f831b9a0$047c6395@sprint,
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 says...
 Simple answer-- from a college level text book.
Jin

 It is 10. I hope, you are talking about Variance
 Inflation Factor. More 
 than
 10 indicates severe multicollinearity.
 
 
 And where does this magic number come from? :)
 
 
 Jin
 
 Jineshwar Singh, Coordinator, IDS
 Interdisciplinary Department
 George Brown College
 St .James campus
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 *
 You cannot control how others act but you can
 control how you react.
 416 -415-2089
 http://www.gbrownc.on.ca/~jsingh
 
 - Original Message -
 From: Karen Scheltema [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2000 4:51 PM
 Subject: VIF
 
 
  What is the usual cutoff for saying the VIF is
 too high?
 
  Karen Scheltema, M.A., M.S.
  Statistician
  HealthEast
  1700 University Ave W
  St. Paul, MN 55104
  (651) 232-5212   fax: (651) 641-0683
 
 -- 
 T.S. Lim
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 www.Recursive-Partitioning.com

__
 Get paid to write a review!
 http://recursive-partitioning.epinions.com
 
 
 

===
 This list is open to everyone.  Occasionally, less
 thoughtful
 people send inappropriate messages.  Please DO NOT
 COMPLAIN TO
 THE POSTMASTER about these messages because the
 postmaster has no
 way of controlling them, and excessive complaints
 will result in
 termination of the list.
 
 For information about this list, including
 information about the
 problem of inappropriate messages and information
 about how to
 unsubscribe, please see the web page at
 http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/

===
 
 
 


=
J. Singh
I.D.S
George brown College
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.gbrownc.on.ca/~jsingh

__
Do You Yahoo!?
Send instant messages  get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com/


===
This list is open to everyone.  Occasionally, less thoughtful
people send inappropriate messages.  Please DO NOT COMPLAIN TO
THE POSTMASTER about these messages because the postmaster has no
way of controlling them, and excessive complaints will result in
termination of the list.

For information about this list, including information about the
problem of inappropriate messages and information about how to
unsubscribe, please see the web page at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
===



Re: VIF

2000-05-31 Thread Donald F. Burrill

On Wed, 31 May 2000, jineshwar singh wrote:

 --- "Donald F. Burrill" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Yes, I knew I'd written that...  It took me a while to find it, but 
the sole addition I could find in your post was the statement

VIF=10 is based on empirical data. 

If this is indeed your intended comment, where can those data, or an 
adequate description of them, be found?  
 (The value "10" still looks to me like an arbitrary out-of-the-blue 
rule-of-thumb sort of value.  I bet that if we had six digits on each 
hand instead of five, the value used would still be reported "10", but 
would mean a value 20% larger.  Wonder what value the Babylonians, with 
their hexagesimal number system, would have used?...)

  On 31 May 2000, Vmcw wrote:
  VIF=10 is based on empirical data. 
   It is 10. I hope, you are talking about Variance
  Inflation Factor. 
   More than 10 indicates severe multicollinearity.
  
  Thus spake Jin Singh.  ...

  snip, the rest  

 
 Donald F. Burrill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 348 Hyde Hall, Plymouth State College,  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 MSC #29, Plymouth, NH 03264 603-535-2597
 184 Nashua Road, Bedford, NH 03110  603-471-7128  



===
This list is open to everyone.  Occasionally, less thoughtful
people send inappropriate messages.  Please DO NOT COMPLAIN TO
THE POSTMASTER about these messages because the postmaster has no
way of controlling them, and excessive complaints will result in
termination of the list.

For information about this list, including information about the
problem of inappropriate messages and information about how to
unsubscribe, please see the web page at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
===



Re: VIF

2000-05-31 Thread Alan Neustadtl

On Tue, 30 May 2000 22:12:11 -0400 (EDT), Donald F. Burrill wrote:

On 31 May 2000, Vmcw wrote:

 It is 10. I hope, you are talking about Variance Inflation Factor. 
 More than 10 indicates severe multicollinearity.

 And where does this magic number come from? :)



One place I have seen the magic number referenced is in Besley, Kuh,
and Welsh, _Regression Diagnostics_.  This is an excellent reference. 
Also, Belsley's _Conditioning Diagnostics_.

Best,
Alan



===
This list is open to everyone.  Occasionally, less thoughtful
people send inappropriate messages.  Please DO NOT COMPLAIN TO
THE POSTMASTER about these messages because the postmaster has no
way of controlling them, and excessive complaints will result in
termination of the list.

For information about this list, including information about the
problem of inappropriate messages and information about how to
unsubscribe, please see the web page at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
===



RE: VIF

2000-05-30 Thread Dale Glaser

Karen..off the top of my head, the VIF is the inverse of tolerance, hence,
if tolerance = (1 - r^2j), then VIF=
1/(1-r^2j)..[excuse the sloppiness of the notation, but r^2j would be the
percentage of variation accounted for by the predictors in predicting the
other predictor..ie., the linear combination of x1 and x2 in predicting x3];
anyway, as with any cutoff value there can be an element of arbitrariness,
though some have registered concern if VIF  10.0; my personal (possibly
misinformed!) opinion is that the aforementioned cutoff value is way too
liberal; for VIF to equal 10.0 then 1/=(1 - .9) entails a multiple R of
.9486!!!; for me it is a stretch to conceive that collinearity only becomes
problematic when R = .9486...I'll be interested to see what others
think

Dale Glaser, Ph.D.
Senior Statistician, Pacific Science and Engineering Group
Adjunct faculty/lecturer, SDSU/USD/CSPP
San Diego, CA.



-Original Message-
From:   [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
On Behalf Of Karen Scheltema
Sent:   Tuesday, May 30, 2000 1:52 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:VIF

What is the usual cutoff for saying the VIF is too high?

Karen Scheltema, M.A., M.S.
Statistician
HealthEast
1700 University Ave W
St. Paul, MN 55104
(651) 232-5212   fax: (651) 641-0683


Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com



===
This list is open to everyone.  Occasionally, less thoughtful
people send inappropriate messages.  Please DO NOT COMPLAIN TO
THE POSTMASTER about these messages because the postmaster has no
way of controlling them, and excessive complaints will result in
termination of the list.

For information about this list, including information about the
problem of inappropriate messages and information about how to
unsubscribe, please see the web page at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
===



===
This list is open to everyone.  Occasionally, less thoughtful
people send inappropriate messages.  Please DO NOT COMPLAIN TO
THE POSTMASTER about these messages because the postmaster has no
way of controlling them, and excessive complaints will result in
termination of the list.

For information about this list, including information about the
problem of inappropriate messages and information about how to
unsubscribe, please see the web page at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
===



Re: VIF

2000-05-30 Thread Jineshwar Singh

It is 10. I hope, you are talking about Variance Inflation Factor. More than
10 indicates severe multicollinearity.
Jin

Jineshwar Singh, Coordinator, IDS
Interdisciplinary Department
George Brown College
St .James campus
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
You cannot control how others act but you can
control how you react.
416 -415-2089
http://www.gbrownc.on.ca/~jsingh

- Original Message -
From: Karen Scheltema [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2000 4:51 PM
Subject: VIF


 What is the usual cutoff for saying the VIF is too high?

 Karen Scheltema, M.A., M.S.
 Statistician
 HealthEast
 1700 University Ave W
 St. Paul, MN 55104
 (651) 232-5212   fax: (651) 641-0683

 
 Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com




===
 This list is open to everyone.  Occasionally, less thoughtful
 people send inappropriate messages.  Please DO NOT COMPLAIN TO
 THE POSTMASTER about these messages because the postmaster has no
 way of controlling them, and excessive complaints will result in
 termination of the list.

 For information about this list, including information about the
 problem of inappropriate messages and information about how to
 unsubscribe, please see the web page at
 http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/

===




===
This list is open to everyone.  Occasionally, less thoughtful
people send inappropriate messages.  Please DO NOT COMPLAIN TO
THE POSTMASTER about these messages because the postmaster has no
way of controlling them, and excessive complaints will result in
termination of the list.

For information about this list, including information about the
problem of inappropriate messages and information about how to
unsubscribe, please see the web page at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
===



RE: VIF

2000-05-30 Thread Donald F. Burrill

On Tue, 30 May 2000, Dale Glaser wrote:

 Karen..off the top of my head, the VIF is the inverse of tolerance, 
 hence, if tolerance = (1 - r^2j), then VIF = 1/(1-r^2j)..

Yes, Dale is correct.

 ... r^2j would be the percentage of variation accounted for by the 
 predictors in predicting the other predictor.. e.g., the linear 
 combination of x1 and x2 in predicting x3;
 anyway, as with any cutoff value there can be an element of 
 arbitrariness, 
Indeed.

 though some have registered concern if VIF  10.0; my personal opinion 
 is that the aforementioned cutoff value is way too liberal; 

I agree, if one is using the idea of "cutoff";  though possibly I am 
thinking of "conservative" rather than "liberal", since I have seen (and 
dealt with) VIFs exceeding several hundreds.  They don't frighten me 
particularly, partly because by orthogonalizing they can be reduced to 
manageable levels.  Even partly orthogonalizing can reduce VIFs to values 
like 2 or 1.5, at least in some circumstances.

 for VIF to equal 10.0 then 1/=(1 - .9) entails a multiple R of  
 .9486!!!; for me it is a stretch to conceive that collinearity only 
 becomes problematic when R = .9486...I'll be interested to see what 
 others think

Strictly speaking, "multicollinearity" implies R = 1.000, I believe. 
(I don't know why Dale calculates R;  the effective information is that 
[with VIF = 10] R^2 = 0.9, and 10% of the original variance in the 
predictor remains unaccounted for.  As one of our colleagues (Rich 
Ulrich, I think) recently remarked in another context, with R^2 values 
this large one may often usefully consider their complementary values 
(1 - R^2).)
 Most computer regression programs have a control based on tolerance (the
reciprocal of VIF);  I believe Minitab's default tolerance threshold is
around 0.0001 or 0.0002, implying VIFs of 10,000 or 5,000 respectively. 
This of course is not to be taken as an indication of "good practice", 
but of where the systems analysts thought the algorithm was in danger of 
breaking down:  "severe multicollinearity" indeed. 

But a lurking question, as my earlier post may have suggested, is 
whether the multicollinearity apparently present is inherent in the 
nature of the variables, or an artifact of variable construction.
The latter was the case in the problem addressed in the paper on the 
Minitab web site.

Karen's original question was:

 What is the usual cutoff for saying the VIF is too high?

Depends on the purpose for which you think you want a "cutoff", and 
whether you propose to implement it blindly and without further thought, 
or as a (very!) rough guideline regarding where the currents (and perhaps 
the undertow) may be dangerous and REQUIRE further thought;  just for two 
examples.
-- Don.
 
 Donald F. Burrill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 348 Hyde Hall, Plymouth State College,  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 MSC #29, Plymouth, NH 03264 603-535-2597
 184 Nashua Road, Bedford, NH 03110  603-471-7128  



===
This list is open to everyone.  Occasionally, less thoughtful
people send inappropriate messages.  Please DO NOT COMPLAIN TO
THE POSTMASTER about these messages because the postmaster has no
way of controlling them, and excessive complaints will result in
termination of the list.

For information about this list, including information about the
problem of inappropriate messages and information about how to
unsubscribe, please see the web page at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
===



Re: VIF

2000-05-30 Thread Alan Miller

Karen Scheltema wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]...
What is the usual cutoff for saying the VIF is too high?

I don't see that there can be any general criterion for saying that
a VIF is too large.   A large value indicates collinearity between
predictor variables.   In some fields, this cannot be avoided.
I have one set of set for which most of the VIFs are in excess
of a million.   The data are from NIR spectroscopy, where this
is unavoidable.

If you do have large VIFs then make sure that your least-squares
software uses some form of orthogonal reduction.   If it uses
the normal equations, and hence squares the condition number,
then you could be in trouble.


Karen Scheltema, M.A., M.S.
Statistician
HealthEast
1700 University Ave W
St. Paul, MN 55104
(651) 232-5212   fax: (651) 641-0683


--
Alan Miller, Retired Scientist (Statistician)
CSIRO Mathematical  Information Sciences
Alan.Miller -at- vic.cmis.csiro.au
http://www.ozemail.com.au/~milleraj
http://users.bigpond.net.au/amiller/





===
This list is open to everyone.  Occasionally, less thoughtful
people send inappropriate messages.  Please DO NOT COMPLAIN TO
THE POSTMASTER about these messages because the postmaster has no
way of controlling them, and excessive complaints will result in
termination of the list.

For information about this list, including information about the
problem of inappropriate messages and information about how to
unsubscribe, please see the web page at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
===



Re: VIF

2000-05-30 Thread T.S. Lim

In article 000701bfca86$f831b9a0$047c6395@sprint, [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
says...

It is 10. I hope, you are talking about Variance Inflation Factor. More 
than
10 indicates severe multicollinearity.


And where does this magic number come from? :)


Jin

Jineshwar Singh, Coordinator, IDS
Interdisciplinary Department
George Brown College
St .James campus
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
You cannot control how others act but you can
control how you react.
416 -415-2089
http://www.gbrownc.on.ca/~jsingh

- Original Message -
From: Karen Scheltema [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2000 4:51 PM
Subject: VIF


 What is the usual cutoff for saying the VIF is too high?

 Karen Scheltema, M.A., M.S.
 Statistician
 HealthEast
 1700 University Ave W
 St. Paul, MN 55104
 (651) 232-5212   fax: (651) 641-0683

-- 
T.S. Lim
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.Recursive-Partitioning.com
__
Get paid to write a review! http://recursive-partitioning.epinions.com



===
This list is open to everyone.  Occasionally, less thoughtful
people send inappropriate messages.  Please DO NOT COMPLAIN TO
THE POSTMASTER about these messages because the postmaster has no
way of controlling them, and excessive complaints will result in
termination of the list.

For information about this list, including information about the
problem of inappropriate messages and information about how to
unsubscribe, please see the web page at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
===



Re: VIF

2000-05-30 Thread Vmcw

It is 10. I hope, you are talking about Variance Inflation Factor. More 
than
10 indicates severe multicollinearity.


And where does this magic number come from? :)


Neter, Wasserman, Nachtsheim, and Kutner, of course!  (or is it Wasserman,
Kutner, Neter, and Nachtsheim or one of the other 22 permutations?).

Tom in PA


===
This list is open to everyone.  Occasionally, less thoughtful
people send inappropriate messages.  Please DO NOT COMPLAIN TO
THE POSTMASTER about these messages because the postmaster has no
way of controlling them, and excessive complaints will result in
termination of the list.

For information about this list, including information about the
problem of inappropriate messages and information about how to
unsubscribe, please see the web page at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
===



Re: VIF

2000-05-30 Thread Donald F. Burrill

On 31 May 2000, Vmcw wrote:

 It is 10. I hope, you are talking about Variance Inflation Factor. 
 More than 10 indicates severe multicollinearity.

Thus spake Jin Singh.  And someone else (was it Dave Heiser?) retorted, 
sensibly I thought,

 And where does this magic number come from? :)

To which Tom in PA replied (possibly tongue-in-cheek?), 

 Neter, Wasserman, Nachtsheim, and Kutner, of course!  (or is it Wasserman,
 Kutner, Neter, and Nachtsheim or one of the other 22 permutations?).

I've heard of a Wasserman (or Wassermann?) test, but didn't think it had 
to do with VIF.  Dunno about all those other blokes.  But apart from 
argument by Appeal to Irrelevant Authority at HeadQuarters, was there 
actually some _reasoning_ underlying the selection of VIF = 10, or was 
it just someone's arbitrary guess (like the 10 subjects per variable one 
is supposed to have before one dares essay a factor analysis)?
-- Don.
 
 Donald F. Burrill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 348 Hyde Hall, Plymouth State College,  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 MSC #29, Plymouth, NH 03264 603-535-2597
 184 Nashua Road, Bedford, NH 03110  603-471-7128  



===
This list is open to everyone.  Occasionally, less thoughtful
people send inappropriate messages.  Please DO NOT COMPLAIN TO
THE POSTMASTER about these messages because the postmaster has no
way of controlling them, and excessive complaints will result in
termination of the list.

For information about this list, including information about the
problem of inappropriate messages and information about how to
unsubscribe, please see the web page at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
===