Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
A comparison of logistic regression methods for Ising model estimation
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
A comparison of logistic regression methods for Ising model estimation
Do you wish to request the book?
A comparison of logistic regression methods for Ising model estimation
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
A comparison of logistic regression methods for Ising model estimation
2023
Overview
The Ising model has received significant attention in network psychometrics during the past decade. A popular estimation procedure is IsingFit, which uses nodewise
l
1
-regularized logistic regression along with the extended Bayesian information criterion to establish the edge weights for the network. In this paper, we report the results of a simulation study comparing IsingFit to two alternative approaches: (1) a nonregularized nodewise stepwise logistic regression method, and (2) a recently proposed global
l
1
-regularized logistic regression method that estimates all edge weights in a single stage, thus circumventing the need for nodewise estimation. MATLAB scripts for the methods are provided as supplemental material. The global
l
1
-regularized logistic regression method generally provided greater accuracy and sensitivity than IsingFit, at the expense of lower specificity and much greater computation time. The stepwise approach showed considerable promise. Relative to the
l
1
-regularized approaches, the stepwise method provided better average specificity for all experimental conditions, as well as comparable accuracy and sensitivity at the largest sample size.
Publisher
Springer US
