On the influence of imputation in classification: practical issues

The substitution of missing values, also called imputation, is an important data preparation task for many domains. Ideally, the substitution of missing values should not insert biases into the dataset. This aspect has been usually assessed by some measures of the prediction capability of imputation methods. Such measures assume the simulation of missing entries for some attributes whose values are actually known. These artificially missing values are imputed and then compared with the original values. Although this evaluation is useful, it does not allow the influence of imputed values in the ultimate modelling task (e.g. in classification) to be inferred. We argue that imputation cannot be properly evaluated apart from the modelling task. Thus, alternative approaches are needed. This article elaborates on the influence of imputed values in classification. In particular, a practical procedure for estimating the inserted bias is described. As an additional contribution, we have used such a procedure to empirically illustrate the performance of three imputation methods (majority, naive Bayes and Bayesian networks) in three datasets. Three classifiers (decision tree, naive Bayes and nearest neighbours) have been used as modelling tools in our experiments. The achieved results illustrate a variety of situations that can take place in the data preparation practice.

Use of Bayesian Methods for Multivariate Bioequivalence Measures

In this paper, we introduce a Bayesian analysis for bioequivalence data assuming multivariate pharmacokinetic measures. With the introduction of correlation parameters between the pharmacokinetic measures or between the random effects in the bioequivalence models, we observe a good improvement in the bioequivalence results. These results are of great practical interest since they can yield higher accuracy and reliability for the bioequivalence tests, usually assumed by regulatory offices. An example is introduced to illustrate the proposed methodology by comparing the usual univariate bioequivalence methods with multivariate bioequivalence. We also consider some usual existing discrimination Bayesian methods to choose the best model to be used in bioequivalence studies.