Re: multiple regression (intercept)
- From: "illywhacker" <illywhacker@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2005 23:36:32 +0200
Hi Anon.
"Anon." <bob.ohara@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> a ,crit dans le message de
news: 42D65711.1030003@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> I interpreted the OP's question as one where he had noticed something that
> seemed silly, but there was nothing in his comments to suggest that his
> data was anywhere near this region of the parameter space. If it's
> nowhere near, and the linear model seems to fit OK, then I would suggest
> not worrying about it. OTOH, if the linear model doesn't fit OK, or if
> the OP is intending to use the model near to the origin, then yes, he
> should improve the model. One problem is that if there's no data near the
> origin, then it's difficult to see how to select a better model: there's
> no information in the data in that part of the parameter space.
You may be right that he is not concerned with the region near the origin of
the data space. If so, not much more to say. Still, one could construct a
more sophisticated model even if the current data lies away from the origin
were there enough domain knowledge. But that is something only the OP can
provide. As always, the inference is trivial in principle: modelling is key.
illywhacker;
.
- References:
- multiple regression (intercept)
- From: thierry
- Re: multiple regression (intercept)
- From: illywhacker
- Re: multiple regression (intercept)
- From: Anon.
- Re: multiple regression (intercept)
- From: illywhacker
- Re: multiple regression (intercept)
- From: Anon.
- multiple regression (intercept)
- Prev by Date: Re: model selection problem
- Next by Date: Re: r-Squared Question
- Previous by thread: Re: multiple regression (intercept)
- Next by thread: Hetroskedacity problem
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
