Complete all Exercises, and submit answers to Questions on the Coursera platform.
The movie Moneyball focuses on the “quest for the secret of success in baseball”. It follows a low-budget team, the Oakland Athletics, who believed that underused statistics, such as a player’s ability to get on base, better predict the ability to score runs than typical statistics like home runs, RBIs (runs batted in), and batting average. Obtaining players who excelled in these underused statistics turned out to be much more affordable for the team.
In this lab we’ll be looking at data from all 30 Major League Baseball teams and examining the linear relationship between runs scored in a season and a number of other player statistics. Our aim will be to summarize these relationships both graphically and numerically in order to find which variable, if any, helps us best predict a team’s runs scored in a season.
In this lab we will explore the data using the dplyr package and visualize it using the ggplot2 package for data visualization. The data can be found in the companion package for this course, statsr.
Let’s load the packages.
## Warning: package 'dplyr' was built under R version 4.0.2
## Warning: package 'ggplot2' was built under R version 4.0.2
Let’s load up the data for the 2011 season.
In addition to runs scored, there are seven traditionally used variables in the data set: at-bats, hits, home runs, batting average, strikeouts, stolen bases, and wins. There are also three newer variables: on-base percentage, slugging percentage, and on-base plus slugging. For the first portion of the analysis we’ll consider the seven traditional variables. At the end of the lab, you’ll work with the three newer variables on your own.
runs and one of the other numerical variables?
runs and at_bats, using at_bats as the explanatory variable. Exercise: If you knew a team’s at_bats, would you be comfortable using a linear model to predict their number of runs?
If the relationship looks linear, we can quantify the strength of the relationship with the correlation coefficient.
## # A tibble: 1 x 1
## `cor(runs, at_bats)`
## <dbl>
## 1 0.611
In this section you will use an interactive function to investigate what we mean by “sum of squared residuals”. You will need to run this function in your console, not in your markdown document. Running the function also requires that the mlb11 dataset is loaded in your environment.
Think back to the way that we described the distribution of a single variable. Recall that we discussed characteristics such as center, spread, and shape. It’s also useful to be able to describe the relationship of two numerical variables, such as runs and at_bats above.
Just as we used the mean and standard deviation to summarize a single variable, we can summarize the relationship between these two variables by finding the line that best follows their association. Use the following interactive function to select the line that you think does the best job of going through the cloud of points.
## Click two points to make a line.
## Call:
## lm(formula = y ~ x, data = pts)
##
## Coefficients:
## (Intercept) x
## -2789.2429 0.6305
##
## Sum of Squares: 123721.9
After running this command, you’ll be prompted to click two points on the plot to define a line. Once you’ve done that, the line you specified will be shown in black and the residuals in blue. Note that there are 30 residuals, one for each of the 30 observations. Recall that the residuals are the difference between the observed values and the values predicted by the line:
\[ e_i = y_i - \hat{y}_i \]
The most common way to do linear regression is to select the line that minimizes the sum of squared residuals. To visualize the squared residuals, you can rerun the plot command and add the argument showSquares = TRUE.
plot_ss(x = at_bats, y = runs, data = mlb11, showSquares = TRUE)
#Cliquei em dois pontos do gráfico e gerou esse dado ''aleatório''Note that the output from the plot_ss function provides you with the slope and intercept of your line as well as the sum of squares.
Exercise: Using plot_ss, choose a line that does a good job of minimizing the sum of squares. Run the function several times. Report your smallest sum of squares.
It is rather cumbersome to try to get the correct least squares line, i.e. the line that minimizes the sum of squared residuals, through trial and error. Instead we can use the lm function in R to fit the linear model (a.k.a. regression line). (PT BR -> É bastante complicado tentar obter a linha correta de mínimos quadrados, ou seja, a linha que minimiza a soma dos resíduos quadrados, por tentativa e erro. Em vez disso, podemos usar a função lm em R para ajustar o modelo linear (também conhecido como linha de regressão))
The first argument in the function lm is a formula that takes the form y ~ x. Here it can be read that we want to make a linear model of runs as a function of at_bats. The second argument specifies that R should look in the mlb11 data frame to find the runs and at_bats variables.
The output of lm is an object that contains all of the information we need about the linear model that was just fit. We can access this information using the summary function.
##
## Call:
## lm(formula = runs ~ at_bats, data = mlb11)
##
## Residuals:
## Min 1Q Median 3Q Max
## -125.58 -47.05 -16.59 54.40 176.87
##
## Coefficients:
## Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)
## (Intercept) -2789.2429 853.6957 -3.267 0.002871 **
## at_bats 0.6305 0.1545 4.080 0.000339 ***
## ---
## Signif. codes: 0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
##
## Residual standard error: 66.47 on 28 degrees of freedom
## Multiple R-squared: 0.3729, Adjusted R-squared: 0.3505
## F-statistic: 16.65 on 1 and 28 DF, p-value: 0.0003388
Let’s consider this output piece by piece. First, the formula used to describe the model is shown at the top. After the formula you find the five-number summary of the residuals. The “Coefficients” table shown next is key; its first column displays the linear model’s y-intercept and the coefficient of at_bats. With this table, we can write down the least squares regression line for the linear model:
\[ \hat{y} = -2789.2429 + 0.6305 \times at\_bats \]
One last piece of information we will discuss from the summary output is the Multiple R-squared, or more simply, \(R^2\). The \(R^2\) value represents the proportion of variability in the response variable that is explained by the explanatory variable. For this model, 37.3% of the variability in runs is explained by at-bats.
homeruns to predict runs. Using the estimates from the R output, write the equation of the regression line. What does the slope tell us in the context of the relationship between success of a team and its home runs?
# type your code for Question 4 here, and Knit
#Dica important3e - a variável a ser explicada vem primeiro
m2 <- lm(runs ~ homeruns, data = mlb11)
summary(m2)##
## Call:
## lm(formula = runs ~ homeruns, data = mlb11)
##
## Residuals:
## Min 1Q Median 3Q Max
## -91.615 -33.410 3.231 24.292 104.631
##
## Coefficients:
## Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)
## (Intercept) 415.2389 41.6779 9.963 1.04e-10 ***
## homeruns 1.8345 0.2677 6.854 1.90e-07 ***
## ---
## Signif. codes: 0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
##
## Residual standard error: 51.29 on 28 degrees of freedom
## Multiple R-squared: 0.6266, Adjusted R-squared: 0.6132
## F-statistic: 46.98 on 1 and 28 DF, p-value: 1.9e-07
Let’s create a scatterplot with the least squares line for m1 laid on top.
ggplot(data = mlb11, aes(x = at_bats, y = runs)) +
geom_point() +
stat_smooth(method = "lm", se = FALSE)## `geom_smooth()` using formula 'y ~ x'
Here we are literally adding a layer on top of our plot. stat_smooth creates the line by fitting a linear model. It can also show us the standard error se associated with our line, but we’ll suppress that for now.
This line can be used to predict \(y\) at any value of \(x\). When predictions are made for values of \(x\) that are beyond the range of the observed data, it is referred to as extrapolation and is not usually recommended. However, predictions made within the range of the data are more reliable. They’re also used to compute the residuals.
Exercise: If a team manager saw the least squares regression line and not the actual data, how many runs would he or she predict for a team with 5,579 at-bats? Is this an overestimate or an underestimate, and by how much?
To find the observed number of runs for the team with 5,579 at bats you can use the following:
This code first filters for rows observation. at_bats is 5579, and then shows the value of the `runs variable for that observation.
To assess whether the linear model is reliable, we need to check for (1) linearity, (2) nearly normal residuals, and (3) constant variability.
Linearity: You already checked if the relationship between runs and at-bats is linear using a scatterplot. We should also verify this condition with a plot of the residuals vs. fitted (predicted) values.
ggplot(data = m1, aes(x = .fitted, y = .resid)) +
geom_point() +
geom_hline(yintercept = 0, linetype = "dashed") +
xlab("Fitted values") +
ylab("Residuals")Notice here that our model object m1 can also serve as a data set because stored within it are the fitted values (\(\hat{y}\)) and the residuals. Also note that we’re getting fancy with the code here. After creating the scatterplot on the first layer (first line of code), we overlay a horizontal dashed line at \(y = 0\) (to help us check whether residuals are distributed around 0), and we also adjust the axis labels to be more informative. (PT BR -> Observe aqui que nosso objeto de modelo m1 também pode servir como um conjunto de dados, porque armazenados nele estão os valores ajustados (y ^) e os resíduos. Observe também que estamos gostando do código aqui. Após criar o gráfico de dispersão na primeira camada (primeira linha de código), sobrepomos uma linha tracejada horizontal em y = 0 (para nos ajudar a verificar se os resíduos estão distribuídos em torno de 0) e também ajustamos os rótulos dos eixos para serem mais informativos)
Nearly normal residuals: To check this condition, we can look at a histogram
or a normal probability plot of the residuals.
Note that the syntax for making a normal probability plot is a bit different than what you’re used to seeing: we set sample equal to the residuals instead of x, and we set a statistical method qq, which stands for “quantile-quantile”, another name commonly used for normal probability plots.
Constant variability:
Exercise: Choose another one of the seven traditional variables from mlb11 besides at_bats that you think might be a good predictor of runs. Produce a scatterplot of the two variables and fit a linear model. At a glance, does there seem to be a linear relationship?
Exercise: How does this relationship compare to the relationship between runs and at_bats? Use the R\(^2\) values from the two model summaries to compare. Does your variable seem to predict runs better than at_bats? How can you tell?
runs and each of the other five traditional variables. Which variable best predicts runs? Support your conclusion using the graphical and numerical methods we’ve discussed.
# type your code for Question 9 here, and Knit
#R Square de atBats (dado anteriormente)
rsquared_at_bats = 0.3729
rsquared_at_bats## [1] 0.3729
## tibble [30 x 12] (S3: tbl_df/tbl/data.frame)
## $ team : Factor w/ 30 levels "Arizona Diamondbacks",..: 28 4 10 13 26 18 19 16 9 12 ...
## $ runs : int [1:30] 855 875 787 730 762 718 867 721 735 615 ...
## $ at_bats : int [1:30] 5659 5710 5563 5672 5532 5600 5518 5447 5544 5598 ...
## $ hits : int [1:30] 1599 1600 1540 1560 1513 1477 1452 1422 1429 1442 ...
## $ homeruns : int [1:30] 210 203 169 129 162 108 222 185 163 95 ...
## $ bat_avg : num [1:30] 0.283 0.28 0.277 0.275 0.273 0.264 0.263 0.261 0.258 0.258 ...
## $ strikeouts : int [1:30] 930 1108 1143 1006 978 1085 1138 1083 1201 1164 ...
## $ stolen_bases: int [1:30] 143 102 49 153 57 130 147 94 118 118 ...
## $ wins : int [1:30] 96 90 95 71 90 77 97 96 73 56 ...
## $ new_onbase : num [1:30] 0.34 0.349 0.34 0.329 0.341 0.335 0.343 0.325 0.329 0.311 ...
## $ new_slug : num [1:30] 0.46 0.461 0.434 0.415 0.425 0.391 0.444 0.425 0.41 0.374 ...
## $ new_obs : num [1:30] 0.8 0.81 0.773 0.744 0.766 0.725 0.788 0.75 0.739 0.684 ...
## # A tibble: 1 x 1
## `cor(runs, hits)`
## <dbl>
## 1 0.801
##
## Call:
## lm(formula = runs ~ hits, data = mlb11)
##
## Residuals:
## Min 1Q Median 3Q Max
## -103.718 -27.179 -5.233 19.322 140.693
##
## Coefficients:
## Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)
## (Intercept) -375.5600 151.1806 -2.484 0.0192 *
## hits 0.7589 0.1071 7.085 1.04e-07 ***
## ---
## Signif. codes: 0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
##
## Residual standard error: 50.23 on 28 degrees of freedom
## Multiple R-squared: 0.6419, Adjusted R-squared: 0.6292
## F-statistic: 50.2 on 1 and 28 DF, p-value: 1.043e-07
#Deu maior, mas para ter certeza, Falta verificar se o valor passa nos testes -> To assess whether the linear model is reliable, we need to check for (1) linearity, (2) nearly normal residuals, and (3) constant variability.
Rsquared_hits = 0.6419#Verify Linearity
ggplot(data = m12, aes(x = .fitted, y = .resid)) +
geom_point() +
geom_hline(yintercept = 0, linetype = "dashed") +
xlab("Fitted values") +
ylab("Residuals")#Linearidade aparentemente ok, próximo teste Nearly normal residuals...
ggplot(data = m12, aes(x = .resid)) +
geom_histogram(binwidth = 25) +
xlab("Residuals")#sei lá, acho que sim. vamos de HITS
#Hits na dianteira, falta testar dois
#hora de verificar o batting average , passo 1:
plot(mlb11$runs ~ mlb11$bat_avg)## # A tibble: 1 x 1
## `cor(runs, bat_avg)`
## <dbl>
## 1 0.810
##
## Call:
## lm(formula = runs ~ bat_avg, data = mlb11)
##
## Residuals:
## Min 1Q Median 3Q Max
## -94.676 -26.303 -5.496 28.482 131.113
##
## Coefficients:
## Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)
## (Intercept) -642.8 183.1 -3.511 0.00153 **
## bat_avg 5242.2 717.3 7.308 5.88e-08 ***
## ---
## Signif. codes: 0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
##
## Residual standard error: 49.23 on 28 degrees of freedom
## Multiple R-squared: 0.6561, Adjusted R-squared: 0.6438
## F-statistic: 53.41 on 1 and 28 DF, p-value: 5.877e-08
#o R squared deu o maior, vamos antes verificar com os três testes (1) linearity, (2) nearly normal residuals, and (3) constant variability.
ggplot(data = m13, aes(x = .fitted, y = .resid)) +
geom_point() +
geom_hline(yintercept = 0, linetype = "dashed") +
xlab("Fitted values") +
ylab("Residuals")## [1] 0.6561
#vamos para a última alternativa do exercício (terceira né pulei, mas ok) trata-se de WINS
#passo 1 de wins
plot(mlb11$runs ~ mlb11$wins)## # A tibble: 1 x 1
## `cor(runs, wins)`
## <dbl>
## 1 0.601
##
## Call:
## lm(formula = runs ~ wins, data = mlb11)
##
## Residuals:
## Min 1Q Median 3Q Max
## -145.450 -47.506 -7.482 47.346 142.186
##
## Coefficients:
## Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)
## (Intercept) 342.121 89.223 3.834 0.000654 ***
## wins 4.341 1.092 3.977 0.000447 ***
## ---
## Signif. codes: 0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
##
## Residual standard error: 67.1 on 28 degrees of freedom
## Multiple R-squared: 0.361, Adjusted R-squared: 0.3381
## F-statistic: 15.82 on 1 and 28 DF, p-value: 0.0004469
R Squared mais baixo que avg_bat, nem precisa fazer mais nada a resposta é avg_bat
runs?
new_obs) THIS PLAN A
new_slug)
new_onbase) PLAN B
# type your code for Question 10 here, and Knit
# faze a mema coisa comparando
#new_onbase (primeiro)
#new_slug (segundo)
#new_obs (terceiro)
#Passo 1 de new_onbase:
plot(mlb11$runs ~ mlb11$new_onbase)##
## Call:
## lm(formula = runs ~ new_onbase, data = mlb11)
##
## Residuals:
## Min 1Q Median 3Q Max
## -58.270 -18.335 3.249 19.520 69.002
##
## Coefficients:
## Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)
## (Intercept) -1118.4 144.5 -7.741 1.97e-08 ***
## new_onbase 5654.3 450.5 12.552 5.12e-13 ***
## ---
## Signif. codes: 0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
##
## Residual standard error: 32.61 on 28 degrees of freedom
## Multiple R-squared: 0.8491, Adjusted R-squared: 0.8437
## F-statistic: 157.6 on 1 and 28 DF, p-value: 5.116e-13
#(1) linearity
ggplot(data = m81, aes(x = .fitted, y = .resid)) +
geom_point() +
geom_hline(yintercept = 0, linetype = "dashed") +
xlab("Fitted values") +
ylab("Residuals")#(2) nearly normal residuals
ggplot(data = m81, aes(x = .resid)) +
geom_histogram(binwidth = 25) +
xlab("Residuals")## # A tibble: 1 x 1
## `cor(runs, new_slug)`
## <dbl>
## 1 0.947
##
## Call:
## lm(formula = runs ~ new_slug, data = mlb11)
##
## Residuals:
## Min 1Q Median 3Q Max
## -45.41 -18.66 -0.91 16.29 52.29
##
## Coefficients:
## Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)
## (Intercept) -375.80 68.71 -5.47 7.70e-06 ***
## new_slug 2681.33 171.83 15.61 2.42e-15 ***
## ---
## Signif. codes: 0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
##
## Residual standard error: 26.96 on 28 degrees of freedom
## Multiple R-squared: 0.8969, Adjusted R-squared: 0.8932
## F-statistic: 243.5 on 1 and 28 DF, p-value: 2.42e-15
#(1) linearity
ggplot(data = m82, aes(x = .fitted, y = .resid)) +
geom_point() +
geom_hline(yintercept = 0, linetype = "dashed") +
xlab("Fitted values") +
ylab("Residuals")#(2) nearly normal residuals
ggplot(data = m82, aes(x = .resid)) +
geom_histogram(binwidth = 20) +
xlab("Residuals")#estranho, mas acho q é new_slug. Pelo exer´cicio abaixo, o lab nao ia mandar esse não ser. Mas pode estar errad (se estiver errado escrever aqui depois)
#vamo pro último new_obs m83
plot(mlb11$runs ~ mlb11$new_obs)## # A tibble: 1 x 1
## `cor(runs, new_obs)`
## <dbl>
## 1 0.967
##
## Call:
## lm(formula = runs ~ new_obs, data = mlb11)
##
## Residuals:
## Min 1Q Median 3Q Max
## -43.456 -13.690 1.165 13.935 41.156
##
## Coefficients:
## Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)
## (Intercept) -686.61 68.93 -9.962 1.05e-10 ***
## new_obs 1919.36 95.70 20.057 < 2e-16 ***
## ---
## Signif. codes: 0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
##
## Residual standard error: 21.41 on 28 degrees of freedom
## Multiple R-squared: 0.9349, Adjusted R-squared: 0.9326
## F-statistic: 402.3 on 1 and 28 DF, p-value: < 2.2e-16
#Testes bate as condições
#(1) linearity
ggplot(data = m83, aes(x = .fitted, y = .resid)) +
geom_point() +
geom_hline(yintercept = 0, linetype = "dashed") +
xlab("Fitted values") +
ylab("Residuals")#(2) nearly normal residuals
ggplot(data = m83, aes(x = .resid)) +
geom_histogram(binwidth = 25) +
xlab("Residuals")##vou de new_obs para questao 10
Exercise: Check the model diagnostics for the regression model with the variable you decided was the best predictor for runs.
This is a product of OpenIntro that is released under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported. This lab was adapted for OpenIntro by Andrew Bray and Mine Çetinkaya-Rundel from a lab written by the faculty and TAs of UCLA Statistics.