I stumbled on a discussion regarding the usefulness of $R^2$ as a metric. Where $R^2$ is defined as:
$$ \frac{\sum (\hat{y} - \bar{\hat{y}})^2 } {\sum(y - \bar{y})^2 }.$$
The criticism is backed by Carnegie Mellon's Cosma Shalizi and focused on these 4 points:
- $R^2$ does not measure goodness of fit.
- $R^2$ does not measure predictive error.
- $R^2$ does not allow you to compare models using transformed responses.
- $R^2$ does not measure how one variable explains another.
He even suggested that "I have never found a situation where it helped at all.".
The article I read can be found here.
What do you think. Have you encountered any situation where $R^2$ would be useful?