3
$\begingroup$

Does minimizing the $RSS$ in your model always equate to minimizing the $MSE$ as $MSE=\frac{1}{n}\cdot RSS$?

$\endgroup$

2 Answers 2

8
$\begingroup$

Yes, yes it does: This is a trivial application of optimisation rules. So long as $n$ is constant (i.e., does not depend on $\theta$) then for any objective function $F$ and any positive function $h$ you have:

$$\underset{\theta \in \Theta}{\text{arg min }} F(\theta) = \underset{\theta \in \Theta}{\text{arg min }} h(n) F(\theta).$$

For your particular case you have:

$$\underset{\theta \in \Theta}{\text{arg min }} \text{RSS}(\theta) = \underset{\theta \in \Theta}{\text{arg min }} \frac{1}{n} \cdot \text{RSS}(\theta) = \underset{\theta \in \Theta}{\text{arg min }} \text{MSE}(\theta).$$

(Note that in both cases it is the argument that minimises the function that remains unchanged. The actual minimised function value is changed by the corresponding multiplicative constant.)

$\endgroup$
3
$\begingroup$

MSE is just RSS divided by the sample size, so, for a given sample, anything that optimizes one of them will also optimize the other

$\endgroup$

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.