Let <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">R^{}</tex> denote the Bayes risk (minimum expected loss) for the problem of estimating <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">θ ε Θ</tex> , given an observed random variable <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">x</tex> , joint probability distribution <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">F(x,θ)</tex> , and loss function <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">L</tex> . Consider the problem in which the only knowledge of <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">F</tex> is that which can be inferred from samples <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">(x₁,θ₁),(x₂,θ₂), ⋯ ,(xₙ, θₙ)</tex> , where the <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">(xᵢ, θᵢ)'s</tex> are independently identically distributed according to <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">F</tex> . Let the nearest neighbor estimate of the parameter <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">θ</tex> associated with an observation <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">x</tex> be defined to be the parameter <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">θₙ'</tex> associated with the nearest neighbor <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">xₙ'</tex> to <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">x</tex> . Let R be the large sample risk of the nearest neighbor rule. It will be shown, for a wide range of probability distributions, that <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">R ≤ 2R^{}</tex> for metric loss functions and <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">R = 2R^{}</tex> for squared-error loss functions. A simple estimator using the nearest <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">k</tex> neighbors yields <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">R = R^{} (1 + 1/k)</tex> in the squared-error loss case. In this sense, it can be said that at least haft the information in the infinite training set is contained in the nearest neighbor. This paper is an extension of earlier work[q from the problem of classification by the nearest neighbor rule to that of estimation. However, the unbounded loss functions in the estimation problem introduce additional problems concerning the convergence of the unconditional risk. Thus some work is devoted to the investigation of natural conditions on the underlying distribution assuring the desired convergence.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Thomas M. Cover (1968) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: