dc.contributor.author | Bouckaert, Remco R. | |
dc.contributor.author | Frank, Eibe | |
dc.contributor.author | Holmes, Geoffrey | |
dc.contributor.author | Fletcher, Dale | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2011-11-11T03:03:51Z | |
dc.date.available | 2011-11-11T03:03:51Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2011 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Bouckaert, R.R., Frank, E., Holmes, G. & Fletcher, D. (2011). A comparison of methods for estimating prediction intervals in NIR spectroscopy: Size matters. Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems, 109(2), 139-145. | en_NZ |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/10289/5877 | |
dc.description.abstract | In this article we demonstrate that, when evaluating a method for determining prediction intervals, interval size matters more than coverage because the latter can be fixed at a chosen confidence level with good reliability. To achieve the desired coverage, we employ a simple non-parametric method to compute prediction intervals by calibrating estimated prediction errors, and we extend the basic method with a continuum correction to deal with small data sets. In our experiments on a collection of several NIR data sets, we evaluate several existing methods of computing prediction intervals for partial least-squares (PLS) regression. Our results show that, when coverage is fixed at a chosen confidence level, and the number of PLS components is selected to minimize squared error of point estimates, interval estimation based on the classic ordinary least-squares method produces the narrowest intervals, outperforming the U-deviation method and linearization, regardless of the confidence level that is chosen. | en_NZ |
dc.language.iso | en | |
dc.publisher | Elsevier | en_NZ |
dc.relation.uri | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169743911001742 | en_NZ |
dc.subject | NIR | en_NZ |
dc.subject | prediction interval | en_NZ |
dc.subject | PLS regression | en_NZ |
dc.subject | experimental design | en_NZ |
dc.subject | Machine learning | |
dc.title | A comparison of methods for estimating prediction intervals in NIR spectroscopy: Size matters | en_NZ |
dc.type | Journal Article | en_NZ |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1016/j.chemolab.2011.08.008 | en_NZ |
dc.relation.isPartOf | Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems | en_NZ |
pubs.begin-page | 139 | en_NZ |
pubs.edition | December | en_NZ |
pubs.elements-id | 36672 | |
pubs.end-page | 145 | en_NZ |
pubs.issue | 2 | en_NZ |
pubs.volume | 109 | en_NZ |