Modified Kibria-Lukman (MKL) estimator for the Poisson Regression Model: application and simulation

Benedicta B Aladeitan,Olajumoke Oludoun,Adewale F Lukman,Olukayode Adebimpe,Oluwakemi E Abiodun

doi:10.12688/f1000research.53987.2

Benedicta B Aladeitan, Olajumoke Oludoun + Show 3 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.53987.2

Copy DOI

Journal: F1000Research	Publication Date: Dec 14, 2021
Citations: 7	License type: CC BY 4.0

Affiliation: Landmark University

Abstract

Background: Multicollinearity greatly affects the Maximum Likelihood Estimator (MLE) efficiency in both the linear regression model and the generalized linear model. Alternative estimators to the MLE include the ridge estimator, the Liu estimator and the Kibria-Lukman (KL) estimator, though literature shows that the KL estimator is preferred. Therefore, this study sought to modify the KL estimator to mitigate the Poisson Regression Model with multicollinearity. Methods: A simulation study and a real-life study was carried out and the performance of the new estimator was compared with some of the existing estimators. Results: The simulation result showed the new estimator performed more efficiently than the MLE, Poisson Ridge Regression Estimator (PRE), Poisson Liu Estimator (PLE) and the Poisson KL (PKL) estimators. The real-life application also agreed with the simulation result. Conclusions: In general, the new estimator performed more efficiently than the MLE, PRE, PLE and the PKL when multicollinearity was present.

Highlights

A special case of the Generalized Linear Models (GLM) is the Poisson Regression Model (PRM) which is generally applied for count or frequency data modelling
This problem led to the implementation of alternative estimators with single shrinkage parameters such as the Poisson Ridge Regression Estimator (PRE), Poisson Liu Estimator (PLE) and the Poisson KL Estimator (PKLE)
The KL estimator was generally preferred to the ridge regression and Liu estimator in the linear regression model

Summary

14 Dec 2021 version 1

Any reports and responses or comments on the article can be found at the end of the article. The difference between this version and the first is that all corrections that were raised by the three reviewers were effected. The new version included more equations to simplify methods earlier discussed as raised by the reviewers

Introduction

Methods

Conclusion