The relative performances of improved ridge estimators and an empirical bayes estimator: some monte carlo results

Abstract

The relative 'performances of improved ridge estimators and an empirical Bayes estimator are studied by means of Monte Carlo simulations. The empirical Bayes method is seen to perform consistently better in terms of smaller MSE and more accurate empirical coverage than any of the estimators considered here. A bootstrap method is proposed to obtain more reliable estimates of the MSE of ridge esimators. Some theorems on the bootstrap for the ridge estimators are also given and they are used to provide an analytical understanding of the proposed bootstrap procedure. Empirical coverages of the ridge estimators based on the proposed procedure are generally closer to the nominal coverage when compared to their earlier counterparts. In general, except for a few cases, these coverages are still less accurate than the empirical coverages of the empirical Bayes estimator.