The generalization ability of a neural network can sometimes be improved dramatically by regularization. To analyze the improvement one needs more refined results than the asymptotic distribution of the weight vector. Here we study the simple case of one-dimensional linear regression under quadratic regularization, i.e., ridge regression. We study the random design, misspecified case, where we derive expansions for the optimal regularization parameter and the ensuing improvement. It is possible to construct examples where it is best to use no regularization.

The generalization ability of a neural network can sometimes be improved dramatically by regularization. To analyze the improvement oneneeds more refined results than the asymptotic distribution ofthe weight vector. Here we study the simple case of one-dimensional linear regression under quadratic regularization, i.e., ridge regression. We study the random design, misspecified case, where we derive expansions for the optimal regularization parameter andthe ensuing improvement. It is possible to construct examples where it is best to use no regularization.

The generalization ability of a neural network can sometimes be improved dramatically by regularization. To analyze the improvement one needs more refined results than the asymptotic distribution of the weight vector. Here we study the simple case of one-dimensional linear regression under quadratic regularization, i.e., ridge regression. We study the random design, misspecified case, where we derive expansions for the optimal regularization parameter and the ensuing improvement. It is possible to construct examples where it is best to use no regularization.

One method proposed for improving the generalization capability of a feedforward network trained with the backpropagation algorithm is to use artificial training vectors which are obtained by adding noise to the original training vectors. We discuss the connection of such backpropagation training with noise to kernel density and kernel regression estimation. We compare by simulated examples (1) backpropagation, (2) backpropagation with noise, and (3) kernel regression in mapping estimation and pattern classification contexts.

One method proposed for improving the generalization capability of a feedforward networktrained with the backpropagation algorithm is to use artificial training vectors which are obtained by adding noise to the original trainingvectors. We discuss the connection of such backpropagation training with noise to kernel density and kernel regression estimation. We compare by simulated examples (1) backpropagation, (2) backpropagation with noise, and (3) kernel regression in mapping estimation and pattern classification contexts.