Cited by 9,357Statistical Methods and InferenceAdvanced Statistical Methods and ModelsStatistical Methods and Applications

Least angle regression

Open access
Efron, Bradley, Hastie, Trevor, Johnstone, Iain, Tibshirani, Robert·2004·The Annals of Statistics

Abstract

The purpose of model selection algorithms such as All Subsets, Forward Selection and Backward Elimination is to choose a linear model on the basis of the same set of data to which the model will be applied. Typically we have available a large collection of possible covariates from which we hope to select a parsimonious set for the efficient prediction of a response variable. Least Angle Regression (LARS), a new model selection algorithm, is a useful and less greedy version of traditional forward selection methods. Three main properties are derived: (1) A simple modification of the LARS algorithm implements the Lasso, an attractive version of ordinary least squares that constrains the sum of the absolute regression coefficients; the LARS modification calculates all possible Lasso estimates for a given problem, using an order of magnitude less computer time than previous methods. (2) A different LARS modification efficiently implements Forward Stagewise linear regression, another promising new model selection method; this connection explains the similar numerical results previously observed for the Lasso and Stagewise, and helps us understand the properties of both methods, which are seen as constrained versions of the simpler LARS algorithm. (3) A simple approximation for the degrees of freedom of a LARS estimate is available, from which we derive a Cp estimate of prediction error; this allows a principled choice among the range of possible LARS estimates. LARS and its variants are computationally efficient: the paper describes a publicly available algorithm that requires only the same order of magnitude of computational effort as ordinary least squares applied to the full set of covariates.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1214/009053604000000067

Cites

57 of 57 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Unlike stepwise variable selection procedures, LARS does not over-inflate effect size estimates during variable selection nor bias hypothesis tests of those effect sizes.

    “Unlike stepwise variable selection procedures, LARS does not over-inflate effect size estimates during variable selection,14 nor bias hypothesis tests of those effect sizes.19”
  • The structured approach for binary exposures is based on least angle regression (LARS).

    “We developed a structured approach for binary exposures,13 based on least angle regression (LARS),14 that demonstrated more accuracy in simulation than other methods.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Efron, B., Hastie, T., Johnstone, I., & Tibshirani, R.
Affiliations
Stanford University (US)
Venue
The Annals of Statistics
Published
2004-04-01
Volume
32
Issue
2
Pages
407-499
ISSN
  • 0090-5364 (ISSN-L)
  • 2168-8966
OpenAlex
W2063978378
Cited by
9,357
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 145 · 2025: 242 · 2024: 306 · 2023: 355 · 2022: 424 · 2021: 611 · 2020: 542 · 2019: 601 · 2018: 588 · 2017: 566 · 2016: 565 · 2015: 665 · 2014: 630 · 2013: 585 · 2012: 599
FWCI
126.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Annals of Statistics (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • Project Euclid (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (9971405, 0072360, 0072661)
  • National Institutes of Health
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Inference
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Statistical Methods and Models
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Applications
Keywords
least angle regression, LARS, LASSO, model selection, feature selection, forward selection, backward elimination, degrees of freedom, constrained regression, computational efficiency

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review