Some confusion here between logarithms and logits?
Nick
[email protected]
Clive Nicholas
> Bilal Hossain wrote:
>
> > In my PhD project, I was having problem to have a good model with
> > Thikonov Regularization in inverse problem. I checked the data and
> > try to get a good distribution of the data set. I did log transform
> > of raw data and run the model with transformed data. The
> model that I
> > get is fantastic. Now I am happy to put the model, however,
> I think I
> > have to justify the data transformation. So how can I justify?
>
> Like Phil, I would say that's hard to answer your query properly if
> you don't show us _exactly_ what you did. Also like Phil, I'll reply
> using first principles, adding to his comments.
>
> The main justification for log-transforming your dependent variable is
> pretty straightforward: if your variable is a proportional, normalized
> measure ranging from 0 to 1, a regression model may predict values
> that lie outside that range, which wouldn't make any sense, since you
> can't have >100% or <0%, for instance. Another problem is that an
> independent variable has a lot less impact on the extreme margins of
> such a dependent variable than it does at its centre.
>
> Thus, you log-transform (LT) the variable, transforming the scale from
> 0-1 to minus infinity-plus infinity. You now have an unbounded scale
> this is _linear_ in the coefficients. I fit models using LT variables
> in Stata all the time, and I always use -glm- to fit them, adding
> -logit- as the -link()- option. You should find that -glm- suits your
> requirements in this regard.
*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html
* http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
