Abstract
Japanese-automobile data consist of 29 regular and 15 small cars with six independent variables, such as the emission rate (X1), price (X2), number of seats (X3), CO2 (X4), fuel (X4), and sales (X6). The following points are important for this book: (1) LSD discrimination: We can easily recognize that these data are LSD because X1 and X3 can separate two classes completely by two box–whisker plots. (2) Problem 3: The forward stepwise procedure selects X1, X2, X3, X4, X5, and X6 in this order. Although MNM of Revised IP-OLDF and NM of QDF are zeroes in the one-variable model (X1), QDF misclassifies all regular cars as small cars after X3 enters the model because the X3 value in small cars is four (Problem 3). These data are very suitable for explaining Problem 3 because they are easier than examination scores that use 100 items. (3) Explanation of Method 2 by these data: When we discriminate six microarray datasets by eight LDFs, only Revised IP-OLDF can naturally make the feature-selection and reduce the high-dimensionnal gene space to the small gene subspace that is a linearly separable model. We call these subspaces, “Matroska.” We establish the Matroska feature-selection method for the microarray dataset (Method 2), and the data consist of several disjoint small Matroskas with MNM = 0. Because LSD discrimination is not popular now and Method 2 has several unknown ideas, we explain these ideas by these data in addition to the Swiss banknote data from Chap. 6 and Student linearly separable data in Chap. 4. If the data are LSD, the full model is the largest Matroska that contains many smaller Matroskas in it. We already know that the smallest Matroska (the basic gene set or subspase, BGS) can describe the Matroska structure completely because MNM decreases monotonously. On the other hand, LASSO attempts to make feature-selection. If it cannot find BGS in the dataset, it cannot explain the dataset structure. Therefore, LASSO researchers have better examine their method by two common data before examining microarray datasets. If they are not successful in these ordinary data, it is not logical for them to expect a successful result for gene analysis. In particular, Japanese-automobile data are simple data for feature-selection because only two one-variable models are linearly separable and BGSs.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
See many studies of DEA analysis at Japanese researcher’s DB: http://researchmap.jp/read0049917/. You can download over 14 papers from Misc(ellanies) category after 2013.
References
Buhlmann P, Geer AB (2011) Statistics for high-dimensional data-method, theory and applications. Springer, Berlin
Cox DR (1958) The regression analysis of binary sequences (with discussion). J Roy Stat Soc B 20:215–242
Firth D (1993) Bias reduction of maximum likelihood estimates. Biometrika 80:27–39
Fisher RA (1936) The use of multiple measurements in taxonomic problems. Ann Eugenics 7:179–188
Fisher RA (1956) Statistical methods and statistical inference. Hafner Publishing Co, New Zealand
Flury B, Rieduyl H (1988) Multivariate statistics: a practical approach. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Friedman JH (1989) Regularized discriminant analysis. J Am Stat Assoc 84(405):165–175
Goodnight JH (1978) SAS technical report—the sweep operator: its importance in statistical computing—(R100). SAS Institute Inc, USA
Jeffery IB, Higgins DG, Culhane C (2006) Comparison and evaluation of methods for generating differentially expressed gene lists from microarray data. BMC Bioinf. Jul 26 7:359:1–16. doi: 10.1186/1471-2105-7-359
Lachenbruch PA, Mickey MR (1968) Estimation of error rates in discriminant analysis. Technometrics 10:1–11
Sall JP, Creighton L, Lehman A (2004) JMP start statistics, third edition. SAS Institute Inc., USA. (Shinmura S. edits Japanese version)
Schrage L (1991) LINDO—an optimization modeling systems. The Scientific Press, UK. (Shinmura S. & Takamori, H. translate Japanese version)
Schrage L (2006) Optimization Modeling with LINGO. LINDO Systems Inc. (Shinmura S. translates Japanese version)
Shinmura S (1998) optimal linear discriminant functions using mathematical programming. J Jpn Soc Comput Stat 11/2:89–101
Shinmura S, Tarumi T (2000) Evaluation of the optimal linear discriminant functions using integer programming (IP-OLDF) for the normal random data. J Jpn Soc Comput Stat 12(2):107–123
Shinmura S (2000a) A new algorithm of the linear discriminant function using integer programming. New Trends Prob Stat 5:133–142
Shinmura S (2000b) Optimal linear discriminant function using mathematical programming. Dissertation, March 200:1–101, Okayama University, Japan
Shinmura S (2003) Enhanced algorithm of IP-OLDF. ISI2003 CD-ROM, pp 428–429
Shinmura S (2004) New algorithm of discriminant analysis using integer programming. IPSI 2004 Pescara VIP Conference CD-ROM, pp 1–18
Shinmura S (2005) New age of discriminant analysis by IP-OLDF –beyond Fisher’s linear discriminant function. ISI2005, pp 1–2
Shinmura S (2007) Overviews of discriminant function by mathematical programming. J Jpn Soc Comput Stat 20(1–2):59–94
Shinmura S (2010a) The optimal linearly discriminant function. Union of Japanese Scientist and Engineer Publishing, Japan
Shinmura S (2010b) Improvement of CPU time of Revised IP-OLDF using Linear Programming. J Jpn Soc Comput Stat 22(1):39–57
Shinmura S (2011a) Beyond Fisher’s linear discriminant analysi—new world of the discriminant analysis. ISI CD-ROM, pp 1–6
Shinmura S (2011b) Problems of discriminant analysis by mark sense test data. Jpn Soc Appl Stat 40(3):157–172
Shinmura S (2013) Evaluation of optimal linear discriminant function by 100-fold cross-validation. ISI CD-ROM, pp 1–6
Shinmura S (2014a) End of discriminant functions based on variance-covariance matrices. ICORE2014, pp 5–16
Shinmura S (2014b) Improvement of CPU time of linear discriminant functions based on MNM criterion by IP. Stat Optim Inf Comput 2:114–129
Shinmura S (2014c) Comparison of linear discriminant functions by k-fold cross-validation. Data Anal 2014:1–6
Shinmura S (2015a) The 95 % confidence intervals of error rates and discriminant coefficients. Stat Optim Inf Comput 2:66–78
Shinmura S (2015b) Four serious problems and new facts of the discriminant analysis. In: Pinson E, Valente F, Vitoriano B (ed) Operations research and enterprise systems, pp 15–30. Springer, Berlin (ISSN: 1865-0929, ISBN: 978-3-319-17508-9, doi:10.1007/978-3-319-17509-6)
Shinmura S (2015c) A trivial linear discriminant function. Stat Optim Inf Comput 3:322–335. doi:10.19139/soic.20151202
Shinmura S (2015d) Four problems of the discriminant analysis. ISI 2015:1–6
Shinmura S (2015e) The discrimination of microarray data (Ver. 1). Res Gate 1:1–4. 28 Oct 2015
Shinmura S (2015f) Feature selection of three microarray data. Res Gate 2:1–7. 1 Nov 2015
Shinmura S (2015g) Feature Selection of Microarray Data (3)—Shipp et al. Microarray Data. Research Gate (3) 1–11
Shinmura S (2015h) Validation of feature selection (4)—Alon et al. microarray data. Res Gate (4) 1–11
Shinmura S (2015i) Repeated feature selection method for microarray data (5). Res Gate 5:1–12. 9 Nov 2015
Shinmura S (2015j) Comparison Fisher’s LDF by JMP and revised IP-OLDF by LINGO for microarray data (6). Res Gate 6:1–10. 11 Nov 2015
Shinmura S (2015k) Matroska trap of feature selection method (7)—Golub et al. microarray data. Res Gate (7), 18:1–14
Shinmura S (2015l) Minimum Sets of Genes of Golub et al. Microarray Data (8). Res Gate (8) 1–12. 22 Nov 2015
Shinmura S (2015m) Complete lists of small matroska in Shipp et al. microarray data (9). Res Gate (9) 1–81
Shinmura S (2015n) Sixty-nine small matroska in Golub et al. microarray data (10). Res Gate 1–58
Shinmura S (2015o) Simple structure of Alon et al. microarray data (11). Res Gate(1.1) 1–34
Shinmura S (2015p) Feature selection of Singh et al. microarray data (12). Res Gate (12) 1–89
Shinmura S (2015q) Final list of small matroska in Tian et al. microarray data. Res Gate (13) 1–160
Shinmura S (2015r) Final list of small matroska in Chiaretti et al. microarray data. Res Gate (14) 1–16
Shinmura S (2016a) The best model of swiss banknote data. Stat Optim Inf Comput, 4:118–131. International Academic Press (ISSN: 2310-5070 (online) ISSN: 2311-004X (print), doi:10.19139/soic.v4i2.178)
Shinmura S (2016b) Matroska featurE−selection method for microarray data. Biotechnology 2016:1–6
Shinmura S (2016c) The Best Model of Swiss banknote data. Statistics, Optimization and Information Computing, vol. X: 0–13
Simon N, Friedman J, Hastie T, Tibshirani R (2013) A sparsE−group lasso. J Comput Graph Stat 22:231–245
Vapnik V (1995) The nature of statistical learning theory. Springer, Berlin
Bibliography
Alon U, Barkai N, Notterman DA, Gish K, Ybarra S, Mack D, Levine AJ, Broad AJ (1999) Patterns of gene expression revealed by clustering analysis of tumor and normal colon tissues probed by oligonucleotide arrays. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 96:6745–6750
Chiaretti S, Li X, Gentleman R, Vitale A, Vignetti M, Mandelli F, Ritz J, Chiaretti RF (2004) Gene expression profile of adult T-cell acute lymphocytic leukemia identifies distinct subsets of patients with different response to therapy and survival. Blood, 103/7:2771–2778
Golub TR, Slonim DK, Tamayo P, Huard C, Gaasenbeek M, Mesirov JP, Coller H, Loh ML, Downing JR, Caligiuri MA, Bloomfield CD, Lander ES (1999) Molecular Classification of Cancer: Class Discovery and Class Prediction by Gene Expression Monitoring. Science 286(5439):531–537
Miyake A, Shinmura S (1976) Error rate of linear discriminant function. In: Dombal FT, Gremy F (ed). North-Holland Publishing Company, The Netherland, pp 435–445
Sall JP (1981) SAS regression applications. SAS Institute Inc., USA. (Shinmura S. translate Japanese version)
Shipp MA, Ross KN, Tamayo P, Weng AP, Kutok JL, Aguiar RC, Gaasenbeek M, Angelo M, Reich M, Pinkus GS, Ray TS, Koval MA, Last KW, Norton A, Lister TA, Mesirov J, Neuberg DS, Lander ES, Aster JC, Golub TR (2002) Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma outcome prediction by genE−expression profiling and supervised machine learning. Nat Med 8:68–74
Singh D, Febbo PG, Ross K, Jackson DG, Manola J, Ladd C, Tamayo P, Renshaw AA, D’Amico A, Richie JP, Lander ES, Lada M, Kantoff PW, Golub TR, Sellers WR (2002) Gene expression correlates of clinical prostate cancer behavior. Cancer Cell 1:203–209
Taguchi G, Jugular R (2002) The mahalanobis-taguchi strategy—a pattern technology system. Wiley, New York
Tian E, Zhan F, Walker R, Rasmussen E, Ma Y, Barlogie B, Shaughnessy JD (2003) The role of the wnt-signaling antagonist dkk1 in the development of osteolytic lesions in multiple myeloma. New Engl J Med 349(26):2483–2494
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer Science+Business Media Singapore
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Shinmura, S. (2016). Japanese-Automobile Data. In: New Theory of Discriminant Analysis After R. Fisher. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2164-0_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2164-0_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-10-2163-3
Online ISBN: 978-981-10-2164-0
eBook Packages: Mathematics and StatisticsMathematics and Statistics (R0)