JSM 2005 - Toronto

Abstract #303547

This is the preliminary program for the 2005 Joint Statistical Meetings in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Currently included in this program is the "technical" program, schedule of invited, topic contributed, regular contributed and poster sessions; Continuing Education courses (August 7-10, 2005); and Committee and Business Meetings. This on-line program will be updated frequently to reflect the most current revisions.

To View the Program:
You may choose to view all activities of the program or just parts of it at any one time. All activities are arranged by date and time.



The views expressed here are those of the individual authors
and not necessarily those of the ASA or its board, officers, or staff.


The Program has labeled the meeting rooms with "letters" preceding the name of the room, designating in which facility the room is located:

Minneapolis Convention Center = “MCC” Hilton Minneapolis Hotel = “H” Hyatt Regency Minneapolis = “HY”

Back to main JSM 2005 Program page



Legend: = Applied Session, = Theme Session, = Presenter
Activity Number: 226
Type: Contributed
Date/Time: Tuesday, August 9, 2005 : 8:30 AM to 10:20 AM
Sponsor: Biometrics Section
Abstract - #303547
Title: Prediction Error Estimation: A Comparison of Resampling Methods
Author(s): Ruth Pfeiffer*+ and Annette Molinaro and Richard Simon
Companies: National Cancer Institute and NCI/Yale University and National Institutes of Health
Address: 6120 Executive Blvd EPS 8030, Rockville, MD, 20852, United States
Keywords: Mixture Models ; Semiparametrics
Abstract:

In genomic studies, thousands of features are collected on relatively few samples. One of the goals of these studies is to build classifiers to predict the outcome of future observations. There are three inherent steps to this process: feature selection, model selection, and prediction assessment. With a focus on prediction assessment, we compare several methods for estimating the "true" prediction error of a prediction model in the presence of feature selection. For small studies where features are selected from thousands of candidates, the resubstitution and simple split-sample estimates are seriously biased. In these small samples, leave-one-out (LOOCV), 10-fold crossvalidation (CV), and the .632+ bootstrap have the smallest bias for diagonal discriminant analysis, nearest neighbor, and classification trees. LOOCV and 10-fold CV have the smallest bias for linear discriminant analysis. Additionally, LOOCV, 5- and 10-fold CV, and the .632+ bootstrap have the lowest mean square error. The .632+ bootstrap is quite biased in small sample sizes with strong signal to noise ratios. Differences in performance among resampling methods are reduced as the number of specimens available increase.


  • The address information is for the authors that have a + after their name.
  • Authors who are presenting talks have a * after their name.

Back to the full JSM 2005 program

JSM 2005 For information, contact jsm@amstat.org or phone (888) 231-3473. If you have questions about the Continuing Education program, please contact the Education Department.
Revised March 2005