All mistakes are mine...

Given an AR(1) process

We can estimate the following autoregressive coefficients.

In [1]: import numpy as np

In [2]: np.set_printoptions(threshold=25)

In [3]: np.random.seed(1)

In [4]: # make 1000 autoregressive series of length 100

In [5]: # y_0 = 0 by assumption

In [6]: samples = np.zeros((100,1000))

In [7]: for i in range(1,100):

...: error = np.random.randn(1,1000)

...: samples[i] = .9 * samples[i-1] + .01 * error

...:

In [8]: from scipy import sparse

In [9]: from scipy.sparse import linalg as spla

In [10]: # make block diagonal sparse matrix of y_t-1

In [11]: # recommended to build as a linked list

In [12]: spX = sparse.lil_matrix((99*1000,1000))

In [13]: for i in range(1000):

....: spX[i*99:(i+1)*99,i] = samples[:-1,i][:,None]

....:

In [14]: spX = spX.tocsr() # convert it to csr for performance

In [15]: # do the least squares

In [16]: retval = spla.isolve.lsqr(spX, samples[1:,:].ravel('F'), calc_var=True)

In [17]: retval[0]

Out[17]:

array([ 0.88347438, 0.8474124 , 0.85282674, ..., 0.91019165,

0.89698465, 0.76895806])

In [2]: np.set_printoptions(threshold=25)

In [3]: np.random.seed(1)

In [4]: # make 1000 autoregressive series of length 100

In [5]: # y_0 = 0 by assumption

In [6]: samples = np.zeros((100,1000))

In [7]: for i in range(1,100):

...: error = np.random.randn(1,1000)

...: samples[i] = .9 * samples[i-1] + .01 * error

...:

In [8]: from scipy import sparse

In [9]: from scipy.sparse import linalg as spla

In [10]: # make block diagonal sparse matrix of y_t-1

In [11]: # recommended to build as a linked list

In [12]: spX = sparse.lil_matrix((99*1000,1000))

In [13]: for i in range(1000):

....: spX[i*99:(i+1)*99,i] = samples[:-1,i][:,None]

....:

In [14]: spX = spX.tocsr() # convert it to csr for performance

In [15]: # do the least squares

In [16]: retval = spla.isolve.lsqr(spX, samples[1:,:].ravel('F'), calc_var=True)

In [17]: retval[0]

Out[17]:

array([ 0.88347438, 0.8474124 , 0.85282674, ..., 0.91019165,

0.89698465, 0.76895806])

I'm curious if there's any downside to using sparse least squares whenever the RHS of a least squares can be written in block diagonal form.

Hi, Skipper! Could you explain what you mean by "whenever the RHS of a least squares can be written in block diagonal form"?

ReplyDeleteSure. The form comes up from time to time while I'm working on some estimators, where the right hand side is block diagonal and the left hand side can be a long column vector. To be a little more concrete consider the following toy example.

ReplyDeleteimport scikits.statsmodels as sm

from scipy.linalg import block_diag

import numpy as np

data = sm.datasets.longley.Load()

#Fair warning, the design of the datasets objects may change soon!

exog = sm.add_constant(data.exog, prepend=True)

endog = data.endog

#Now we can do

X = block_diag(*[exog]*3)

Y = np.tile(endog, (1,3))

results = sm.OLS(Y,X).fit()

results.params.reshape(3,-1)

In this case, it's really just a way to do many OLS regressions at the same time. I was doing some Monte Carlo experiments on the model Y = XB where I had Y = 98*1000 x 1

and X as a big block diagonal, and instead of looping and doing OLS, I just did one big sparse least squares. The building of the sparse block diagonal was kind of slow though, and I wonder if it couldn't be optimized.