0
$\begingroup$

Interpreting MI as "the amount of uncertainty removed by adding some information", I would expect some connection to $R^2$, which is the "amount of variance explained by adding some information".

In particular, $I(X,Y) = H(Y)-H(Y|X)$, which, poorly rephrased, is, "how uncertain you are about $Y$ to begin with" - "how uncertain you are about $Y$ after you got to know $X$"

On the other hand, $R^2 = 1-\frac{\sum (y_i - f(x_i))^2}{\sum (y_i - \bar{y})^2}$, which, to me, maybe wrongly, is sort of assuming that $p(Y|X) \sim N(0, \sigma_1^2)$ where $\sigma_1^2 = N^{-1}\sum (y_i - f(x_i))^2$ and $p(Y)\sim N(0, \sigma_2^2)$ where $\sigma_2^2 = N^{-1}\sum (y_i - \bar{y})^2$... which leaves us with $R^2 = 1-E_x[Var[p(y|x)]]/Var[p(y)]$

Now, if we define $\hat{R^2} = \frac{Var[p(y)]}{E_x[Var[p(y|x)]]} \propto R^2$ (proportional in a non-linear way), I'd say it looks like that:

$$ I(X,Y) \stackrel{?}{=} \alpha\ln \hat{R^2} = \alpha(\ln(Var[p(y)]) -\ln(E_x[Var[p(y|x)]])),\,\, \text{for some }\alpha \in \mathbb{R}^+ $$

And indeed, the entropy of a Gaussian distribution is $\ln c\sigma^2$

So in other words, it seems like there is indeed a connection between $R^2$ (or at least, its made up brother $\hat{R^2}$) and Mutual Information, if we assume $p(y)$ and $p(y|x)$ to be Gaussian

Am I doing something wrong/saying something that is just made up?

$\endgroup$
3
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ This question is similar to: Relationship between least-squares regression and information theory. If you believe it’s different, please edit the question, make it clear how it’s different and/or how the answers on that question are not helpful for your problem. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 1 at 17:00
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @User1865345 am i missing something or nowhere in that post R^2 is even mentioned? $\endgroup$
    – Alberto
    Commented Nov 1 at 17:19
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I see this as related to, but not a duplicate of, the link. $\endgroup$
    – Dave
    Commented Nov 1 at 17:53

1 Answer 1

2
$\begingroup$

Firstly, mutual information is a measure of statistical dependence between random variables, whereas $R^2$ is a measure of goodness-of-fit. In other words, $I(X;Y)$ is intrinsic to the data, whereas $R^2$ is defined with respect to a predictive model ($f$ in your notation). So they aren't quite directly comparable.

However, for the case of simple linear regression, if $X, Y$ are jointly Gaussian, $R^2$ and $I(X; Y)$ are related.

For Gaussian random variables with correlation $\rho$

$$I(X; Y) = -\frac{1}{2} \log (1-\rho^2)$$

(see Thomas & Cover chapter 8, eqn. 8.52 for details)

And the $R^2$ should be $\rho^2$.

More generally, $I(X;Y)$ can be used to construct an upper bound on $R^2$. This reasoning applies for non-Gaussian data and any choice of $f$. Starting from your observation that

$$R^2 = 1 - \frac{\mathbb{E}[(Y-f(X))^2]}{\mathbb{E}[(Y - \mathbb{E}(Y))^2]}$$

$$\leq 1 - \frac{\text{Var}(Y|X)}{\text{Var}(Y)}$$

we can note that the maximum entropy distribution with fixed variance is a Gaussian, so

$$R^2 \leq 1 - \frac{e^{2 h(Y|X)}}{2\pi e \text{Var}(X)}$$

$$= 1 - \frac{e^{2(h(Y) - I(X;Y))}}{2\pi e \text{Var}(X)}$$

Hope this helps!!

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ lovely i’d say! $\endgroup$
    – Alberto
    Commented Dec 3 at 12:40

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.