When I read The Elements of statistical learning, in the section of "5.5 Automatic Selection of the Smoothing Parameters", equation (5.26) gives a LOOCV formula for corresbonding $\lambda$

Here the background is fitting a smoothing spline using the data $(y_i, x_i)\ i = 1,2,...,N$. In order to select a smoothing parameter, we use LOOCV creteria.

\begin{equation} \text{CV}(\hat{f}_{\lambda}) = \frac{1}{N} \sum_{i=1}^{N} (y_i - \hat{f}_{\lambda}^{(-i)}(x_i))^2=\frac{1}{N}\sum_{i=1}^{N}\left(\frac{y_i - \hat{f}_{\lambda}(x_i)}{1-S_{\lambda}(i,i)}\right) \end{equation}

where $\hat{f}_{\lambda}^{(-i)}$ means fitting value by using model without using $(y_i, x_i)$, and $S_{\lambda}(i,i)$ is the diagonal element of the smoothing matrix $\mathbf{S}_{\lambda}$ based on whole data. ($\mathbf{S}_{\lambda} = (\mathbf{I} + \lambda \mathbf{K})^{-1} = \mathbf{N}(\mathbf{N}^T\mathbf{N} + \lambda \Omega)^{-1} \mathbf{N}^T)$.

(the notation is consistent with chapter 5 in the textbook The Elements of statistical learning)

I wonder how to prove the second equation, so I search online and find the following post is helpful. But when I try to prove the above formula for smoothing matrix, I've run into difficulties and it's hard to carry on.

I can only prove that

\begin{equation} (\mathbf{N}_{(t)}^T\mathbf{N}_{(t)} + \lambda \Omega)^{-1} \mathbf{N}_t^T = (\mathbf{N}^T\mathbf{N} + \lambda \Omega)^{-1} \mathbf{N}_t^T \left(\frac{1}{1-S_{\lambda}(t,t)}\right) \end{equation}

where the supscript $_{(t)}$ means except $t$th one, while $_t$ means the $t$th one.

Could anyone help finish the proof, or using some other method to prove the formula? I'd be grateful.

Helpful post:

@MISC {164223, TITLE = {Proof of LOOCV formula}, AUTHOR = {Clarinetist (https://stats.stackexchange.com/users/46427/clarinetist)}, HOWPUBLISHED = {Cross Validated}, NOTE = {URL:Proof of LOOCV formula (version: 2015-08-04)}, EPRINT = {https://stats.stackexchange.com/q/164223}, URL = {https://stats.stackexchange.com/q/164223} }


I do not know if you are still interested in this but what follows might help you in proving the results you mention in the question (...hope get everything right...it is a slippery notation ^_^).

Here I will use a bit more general notation (since the results you mention hold not only for the smoothing use case)

  • We can consider a ridge regression problem $\displaystyle \min_{\beta} S(\lambda) = \| y - X \beta \|^{2} + \lambda \|\beta\|^{2}$ (if $\lambda = 0$ you will get the same results as the answer you cite).
  • The LOOCV ctiretion in this case tells us to select the optimal regularization parameter as $LOOCV(\lambda) = \displaystyle \min_{\lambda} \sum_{i}^{N}(y_{i} - X_{i} \hat{\beta}_{-i} (\lambda))^{2}$
  • We define $X_{i}$ as the $i$th row of the model matrix $X$
  • We define as $\hat{\beta}_{-i} = (X_{-i}^{\top} X_{-i} + \lambda I)^{-1} X_{-i}^{T} y_{-i}$ the coefficients estimated when the $i$th obs is left out
  • Define as $X_{-i}$ the the model matrix when the $i$th element is left out (analogous definiiton holds for $y_{-i}$)

To derive the result you are interested in we need to find an 'analytic' expression for $\hat{\beta}_{-i}$. The proof proceeds more or less as follows (I will skip some details):

  • The inverse appearing in $\hat{\beta}_{-i}$ can be shown to be equal to (this is an application of the Woodbury identity) $$ (X_{-i}^{\top} X_{-i} + \lambda I)^{-1} = (X^{\top} X + \lambda I)^{-1} + (X^{\top} X + \lambda I)^{-1} X_{i}^{\top} [1-H_{ii}(\lambda)]^{-1} X_{i}(X^{\top} X + \lambda I)^{-1} $$ where $H_{ii}(\lambda) = X_{i}(X^{\top} X + \lambda I)^{-1} X_{i}^{\top}$

  • Plugging the result above in the equation for he LOO estimator, after some algebra, we get: $$ \hat{\beta}_{-i}(\lambda) = \hat{\beta}(\lambda) - (X^{\top} X + \lambda I)^{-1} X_{i}^{\top} [1-H_{ii}(\lambda)]^{-1} (y_{i} - X_{i} \hat{\beta}(\lambda)) $$

  • Plugging the result in the equation for the LOOCV criterion, after some algebra, we can notice that $$ y_{i} - X_{i} \hat{\beta}_{-i}(\lambda) = [1-H_{ii}(\lambda)]^{-1} (y_{i} - X_{i}\hat{\beta}(\lambda)) $$ and hence the results we are looking for follows: $$ LOOCV(\lambda) = \sum_{i=1}^{N} \frac{(y_{i} - X_{i}\hat{\beta}(\lambda))^{2}}{(1 - H_{ii} (\lambda))^{2}} $$

Again, here I skip some detail (mainly tedious algebra) but these are the lines you could follow to prove the results you are interested in. I hope this helps.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Thank you! There's only a small typo in the fomula using Woodbury identity. I think there should be a $X_i$ after $[1-H_{ii}(\lambda)]^{-1}$. $\endgroup$ – Li Xin Jan 3 at 13:15
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Again, there's another small typo in the last formula, I think it should be $\sum_{i=1}^{N} [1-H_{ii}(\lambda)]^{-2}(y_i - X_i\hat{\beta}(\lambda))^2$ $\endgroup$ – Li Xin Jan 3 at 13:38

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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