library(ISLR2)

Exercise 2

Carefully explain the differences between the KNN classifier and KNN regression methods

The difference between the KNN classifier and KNN regression methods is that the classifier is used in situations where the response variable is categorical (qualitative). THe KNN regression methods is used for solve regression problem (quantitative response) by identifying the neighborhood of x0 and then estimating f(x0) as the average of all the training responses in the neighborhood.

Exercise 9

This question involves the use of multiple linear regression on the Auto data set.

(a) Produce a scatterplot matrix which includes all of the variables in the data set.

pairs(Auto)

(b) Compute the matrix of correlations between the variables using the function cor(). You will need to exclude the name variable, which is qualitative.

names(Auto)
## [1] "mpg"          "cylinders"    "displacement" "horsepower"   "weight"      
## [6] "acceleration" "year"         "origin"       "name"
cor(Auto[1:8])
##                     mpg  cylinders displacement horsepower     weight
## mpg           1.0000000 -0.7776175   -0.8051269 -0.7784268 -0.8322442
## cylinders    -0.7776175  1.0000000    0.9508233  0.8429834  0.8975273
## displacement -0.8051269  0.9508233    1.0000000  0.8972570  0.9329944
## horsepower   -0.7784268  0.8429834    0.8972570  1.0000000  0.8645377
## weight       -0.8322442  0.8975273    0.9329944  0.8645377  1.0000000
## acceleration  0.4233285 -0.5046834   -0.5438005 -0.6891955 -0.4168392
## year          0.5805410 -0.3456474   -0.3698552 -0.4163615 -0.3091199
## origin        0.5652088 -0.5689316   -0.6145351 -0.4551715 -0.5850054
##              acceleration       year     origin
## mpg             0.4233285  0.5805410  0.5652088
## cylinders      -0.5046834 -0.3456474 -0.5689316
## displacement   -0.5438005 -0.3698552 -0.6145351
## horsepower     -0.6891955 -0.4163615 -0.4551715
## weight         -0.4168392 -0.3091199 -0.5850054
## acceleration    1.0000000  0.2903161  0.2127458
## year            0.2903161  1.0000000  0.1815277
## origin          0.2127458  0.1815277  1.0000000

(c) Use the lm() function to perform a multiple linear regression with mpg as the response and all other variables except name as the predictors. Use the summary() function to print the results. Comment on the output

lm.fit=lm(mpg~.-name, data=Auto)
summary(lm.fit)
## 
## Call:
## lm(formula = mpg ~ . - name, data = Auto)
## 
## Residuals:
##     Min      1Q  Median      3Q     Max 
## -9.5903 -2.1565 -0.1169  1.8690 13.0604 
## 
## Coefficients:
##                Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)    
## (Intercept)  -17.218435   4.644294  -3.707  0.00024 ***
## cylinders     -0.493376   0.323282  -1.526  0.12780    
## displacement   0.019896   0.007515   2.647  0.00844 ** 
## horsepower    -0.016951   0.013787  -1.230  0.21963    
## weight        -0.006474   0.000652  -9.929  < 2e-16 ***
## acceleration   0.080576   0.098845   0.815  0.41548    
## year           0.750773   0.050973  14.729  < 2e-16 ***
## origin         1.426141   0.278136   5.127 4.67e-07 ***
## ---
## Signif. codes:  0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
## 
## Residual standard error: 3.328 on 384 degrees of freedom
## Multiple R-squared:  0.8215, Adjusted R-squared:  0.8182 
## F-statistic: 252.4 on 7 and 384 DF,  p-value: < 2.2e-16

i. Is there a relationship between the predictors and the response?

Yes, There is a relationship between predictor and the response variable by a p-value < 0.05

ii. Which predictors appear to have a statistically significant relationship to the response?

Displacement, weight, year and origin have a statistically significant relationship with mpg.

iii. What does the coefficient for the year variable suggest?

The year coefficient suggests a positive correlation between increasing 1 year, then the mpg is increased 0.75.

(d) Use the plot() function to produce diagnostic plots of the linear regression fit. Comment on any problems you see with the fit. Do the residual plots suggest any unusually large outliers? Does the leverage plot identify any observations with unusually highleverage?

par(mfrow = c(2, 2))
plot(lm.fit)

which.max(hatvalues(lm.fit))
## 14 
## 14

The plot of residuals versus fitted values indicates the non linearity in the data. The plot of standardized residuals versus leverage indicate the outliers (higher than 2 or lower than -2) and one high leverage point 14.

(e) Use the * and : symbols to fit linear regression models with interaction effects. Do any interactions appear to be statistically significant?

lm.fit1 <- lm(mpg ~ +cylinders : displacement+displacement : weight, data = Auto[, 1:8])
summary(lm.fit1)
## 
## Call:
## lm(formula = mpg ~ +cylinders:displacement + displacement:weight, 
##     data = Auto[, 1:8])
## 
## Residuals:
##      Min       1Q   Median       3Q      Max 
## -11.5522  -3.3109  -0.6592   2.7231  17.4894 
## 
## Coefficients:
##                          Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)    
## (Intercept)             3.126e+01  3.884e-01   80.47  < 2e-16 ***
## cylinders:displacement -7.481e-04  1.335e-03   -0.56    0.576    
## displacement:weight    -1.041e-05  2.546e-06   -4.09 5.25e-05 ***
## ---
## Signif. codes:  0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
## 
## Residual standard error: 4.767 on 389 degrees of freedom
## Multiple R-squared:  0.6288, Adjusted R-squared:  0.6269 
## F-statistic: 329.5 on 2 and 389 DF,  p-value: < 2.2e-16
lm.fit2 <- lm(mpg ~ cylinders * displacement+displacement * weight, data = Auto[, 1:8])
summary(lm.fit2)
## 
## Call:
## lm(formula = mpg ~ cylinders * displacement + displacement * 
##     weight, data = Auto[, 1:8])
## 
## Residuals:
##      Min       1Q   Median       3Q      Max 
## -13.2934  -2.5184  -0.3476   1.8399  17.7723 
## 
## Coefficients:
##                          Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)    
## (Intercept)             5.262e+01  2.237e+00  23.519  < 2e-16 ***
## cylinders               7.606e-01  7.669e-01   0.992    0.322    
## displacement           -7.351e-02  1.669e-02  -4.403 1.38e-05 ***
## weight                 -9.888e-03  1.329e-03  -7.438 6.69e-13 ***
## cylinders:displacement -2.986e-03  3.426e-03  -0.872    0.384    
## displacement:weight     2.128e-05  5.002e-06   4.254 2.64e-05 ***
## ---
## Signif. codes:  0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
## 
## Residual standard error: 4.103 on 386 degrees of freedom
## Multiple R-squared:  0.7272, Adjusted R-squared:  0.7237 
## F-statistic: 205.8 on 5 and 386 DF,  p-value: < 2.2e-16

The interaction between displacement and weight is statistically significant (p-value < 0.05), while the interaction between cylinders and displacement is not (p-value > 0.05)

(f) Try a few different transformations of the variables, such aslog(X), √X, X2. Comment on your findings.

lm.fit3<-lm(log(mpg) ~ . - name, data = Auto)
summary(lm.fit3)
## 
## Call:
## lm(formula = log(mpg) ~ . - name, data = Auto)
## 
## Residuals:
##      Min       1Q   Median       3Q      Max 
## -0.40955 -0.06533  0.00079  0.06785  0.33925 
## 
## Coefficients:
##                Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)    
## (Intercept)   1.751e+00  1.662e-01  10.533  < 2e-16 ***
## cylinders    -2.795e-02  1.157e-02  -2.415  0.01619 *  
## displacement  6.362e-04  2.690e-04   2.365  0.01852 *  
## horsepower   -1.475e-03  4.935e-04  -2.989  0.00298 ** 
## weight       -2.551e-04  2.334e-05 -10.931  < 2e-16 ***
## acceleration -1.348e-03  3.538e-03  -0.381  0.70339    
## year          2.958e-02  1.824e-03  16.211  < 2e-16 ***
## origin        4.071e-02  9.955e-03   4.089 5.28e-05 ***
## ---
## Signif. codes:  0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
## 
## Residual standard error: 0.1191 on 384 degrees of freedom
## Multiple R-squared:  0.8795, Adjusted R-squared:  0.8773 
## F-statistic: 400.4 on 7 and 384 DF,  p-value: < 2.2e-16
par(mfrow=c(2,2))
plot(lm.fit3)

All predictors are statistically significant except acceleration

Exercise 10

This question should be answered using the Carseats data set

attach(Carseats)

(a) Fit a multiple regression model to predict Sales using Price, Urban, and US.

mult_regression <- lm(Sales~Price+Urban+US)
summary(mult_regression)
## 
## Call:
## lm(formula = Sales ~ Price + Urban + US)
## 
## Residuals:
##     Min      1Q  Median      3Q     Max 
## -6.9206 -1.6220 -0.0564  1.5786  7.0581 
## 
## Coefficients:
##              Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)    
## (Intercept) 13.043469   0.651012  20.036  < 2e-16 ***
## Price       -0.054459   0.005242 -10.389  < 2e-16 ***
## UrbanYes    -0.021916   0.271650  -0.081    0.936    
## USYes        1.200573   0.259042   4.635 4.86e-06 ***
## ---
## Signif. codes:  0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
## 
## Residual standard error: 2.472 on 396 degrees of freedom
## Multiple R-squared:  0.2393, Adjusted R-squared:  0.2335 
## F-statistic: 41.52 on 3 and 396 DF,  p-value: < 2.2e-16

(b) Provide an interpretation of each coefficient in the model. Be careful—some of the variables in the model are qualitative!

Urban has no effect on Sales. So, Price and US are two variables used for Sales predictions.Increase $1 in Price, Sales go down by $54.4. Sales inside the US are $1,200 higher than outside the US.

(c) Write out the model in equation form, being careful to handle the qualitative variables properly.

Sales = 13.043469−0.054459XPrice − 0.021916XUrbanYes + 1.200573XUSYes

(d) For which of the predictors can you reject the null hypothesis

Price and US because they have p-value < 0.05

(e) On the basis of your response to the previous question, fit asmaller model that only uses the predictors for which there is evidence of association with the outcome

mult_regression <- lm(Sales~Price+US)
summary(mult_regression)
## 
## Call:
## lm(formula = Sales ~ Price + US)
## 
## Residuals:
##     Min      1Q  Median      3Q     Max 
## -6.9269 -1.6286 -0.0574  1.5766  7.0515 
## 
## Coefficients:
##             Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)    
## (Intercept) 13.03079    0.63098  20.652  < 2e-16 ***
## Price       -0.05448    0.00523 -10.416  < 2e-16 ***
## USYes        1.19964    0.25846   4.641 4.71e-06 ***
## ---
## Signif. codes:  0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
## 
## Residual standard error: 2.469 on 397 degrees of freedom
## Multiple R-squared:  0.2393, Adjusted R-squared:  0.2354 
## F-statistic: 62.43 on 2 and 397 DF,  p-value: < 2.2e-16

(f) How well do the models in (a) and (e) fit the data?

not good

(g) Using the model from (e), obtain 95 % confidence intervals forthe coefficient(s).

confint(mult_regression)
##                   2.5 %      97.5 %
## (Intercept) 11.79032020 14.27126531
## Price       -0.06475984 -0.04419543
## USYes        0.69151957  1.70776632

(h) Is there evidence of outliers or high leverage observations in the model from (e)?

par(mfrow=c(2,2))
plot(mult_regression)

Exercise 12

This problem involves simple linear regression without an intercept

(a) Recall that the coefficient estimate βˆ for the linear regression of Y onto X without an intercept is given by (3.38). Under what circumstance is the coefficient estimate for the regression of X onto Y the same as the coefficient estimate for the regression of Y onto X?

It will be equal if the summation of Xi^2 equals with the summation of Yi^2

(b) Generate an example in R with n = 100 observations in which the coefficient estimate for the regression of X onto Y is different from the coefficient estimate for the regression of Y onto X.

set.seed (1)
x <- rnorm (100)
y <- 2 * x + rnorm (100)
sum(x^2)
## [1] 81.05509
sum(y^2)
## [1] 413.2135
fit.X <- lm(x ~ y + 0)
summary(fit.X)
## 
## Call:
## lm(formula = x ~ y + 0)
## 
## Residuals:
##     Min      1Q  Median      3Q     Max 
## -0.8699 -0.2368  0.1030  0.2858  0.8938 
## 
## Coefficients:
##   Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)    
## y  0.39111    0.02089   18.73   <2e-16 ***
## ---
## Signif. codes:  0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
## 
## Residual standard error: 0.4246 on 99 degrees of freedom
## Multiple R-squared:  0.7798, Adjusted R-squared:  0.7776 
## F-statistic: 350.7 on 1 and 99 DF,  p-value: < 2.2e-16
fit.Y <- lm(y ~ x + 0)
summary(fit.Y)
## 
## Call:
## lm(formula = y ~ x + 0)
## 
## Residuals:
##     Min      1Q  Median      3Q     Max 
## -1.9154 -0.6472 -0.1771  0.5056  2.3109 
## 
## Coefficients:
##   Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)    
## x   1.9939     0.1065   18.73   <2e-16 ***
## ---
## Signif. codes:  0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
## 
## Residual standard error: 0.9586 on 99 degrees of freedom
## Multiple R-squared:  0.7798, Adjusted R-squared:  0.7776 
## F-statistic: 350.7 on 1 and 99 DF,  p-value: < 2.2e-16

(c) Generate an example in R with n = 100 observations in which the coefficient estimate for the regression of X onto Y is the same as the coefficient estimate for the regression of Y onto X

set.seed (1)
x <- rnorm (100)
y <- 1 * x
sum(x^2)
## [1] 81.05509
sum(y^2)
## [1] 81.05509
fit.X <- lm(x ~ y + 0)
summary(fit.X)
## Warning in summary.lm(fit.X): essentially perfect fit: summary may be unreliable
## 
## Call:
## lm(formula = x ~ y + 0)
## 
## Residuals:
##        Min         1Q     Median         3Q        Max 
## -1.888e-16 -1.689e-17  1.339e-18  3.057e-17  2.552e-16 
## 
## Coefficients:
##    Estimate Std. Error   t value Pr(>|t|)    
## y 1.000e+00  6.479e-18 1.543e+17   <2e-16 ***
## ---
## Signif. codes:  0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
## 
## Residual standard error: 5.833e-17 on 99 degrees of freedom
## Multiple R-squared:      1,  Adjusted R-squared:      1 
## F-statistic: 2.382e+34 on 1 and 99 DF,  p-value: < 2.2e-16
fit.Y <- lm(y ~ x + 0)
summary(fit.Y)
## Warning in summary.lm(fit.Y): essentially perfect fit: summary may be unreliable
## 
## Call:
## lm(formula = y ~ x + 0)
## 
## Residuals:
##        Min         1Q     Median         3Q        Max 
## -1.888e-16 -1.689e-17  1.339e-18  3.057e-17  2.552e-16 
## 
## Coefficients:
##    Estimate Std. Error   t value Pr(>|t|)    
## x 1.000e+00  6.479e-18 1.543e+17   <2e-16 ***
## ---
## Signif. codes:  0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
## 
## Residual standard error: 5.833e-17 on 99 degrees of freedom
## Multiple R-squared:      1,  Adjusted R-squared:      1 
## F-statistic: 2.382e+34 on 1 and 99 DF,  p-value: < 2.2e-16