Paper detail

A Geometrical Explanation of Stein Shrinkage

Shrinkage estimation has become a basic tool in the analysis of high-dimensional data. Historically and conceptually a key development toward this was the discovery of the inadmissibility of the usual estimator of a multivariate normal mean. This article develops a geometrical explanation for this inadmissibility. By exploiting the spherical symmetry of the problem it is possible to effectively conceptualize the multidimensional setting in a two-dimensional framework that can be easily plotted and geometrically analyzed. We begin with the heuristic explanation for inadmissibility that was given by Stein [In Proceedings of the Third Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability, 1954--1955, Vol. I (1956) 197--206, Univ. California Press]. Some geometric figures are included to make this reasoning more tangible. It is also explained why Stein's argument falls short of yielding a proof of inadmissibility, even when the dimension, $p$, is much larger than $p=3$. We then extend the geometric idea to yield increasingly persuasive arguments for inadmissibility when $p\geq3$, albeit at the cost of increased geometric and computational detail.

preprint2012arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.