In Partial Fulfillment of The Requirements For The Award of The Degree of
In Partial Fulfillment of The Requirements For The Award of The Degree of
(3.1)
where K is the number of industry factors, c
ik
is a dummy variable equal to one if stock i
belongs to industry category k, z
kt
is the return to the k-th industry factor in period t, and
"kt denotes residuals that are uncorrelated to the market, to industry factors, and to each
other. Every stock is assigned to one of the 48 industries defined by Fama and French
(1997). This high number of factors is similar to the one used by the company BARRA to
produce commercial multi-factor estimates of the covariance matrix (Kahn, 1994).4
Industry factor returns are defined as the return to an equally-weighted portfolio of the
stocks from this industry in our sample.
Principal Components: An alternative approach to multi-factor models is to extract the
factors from the sample covariance matrix itself using a statistical method such as
principal components. Some investment consultants such as Advanced Portfolio
Technologies successfully use a refined version of this approach (Bender and Blin, 1997).
Since principal components are chosen solely for their ability to explain risk, fewer
factors are necessary, but they do not have any direct economic interpretation.5 A
sophisticated test by Connor and Korajczyk (1993) finds between four and seven factors
for the NYSE and AMEX over 19671991, which is in the same range as the original test
by Roll and Ross (1980).
Shrinkage towards Identity: A related shrinkage estimator of Ledoit and Wolf (2000)
uses a scalar multiple of the identity matrix as shrinkage target; note that their estimator,
under a different asymptotic framework, is suggested for general situations where no
natural shrinking target exists. This seems suboptimal for stock returns, since stock
returns have different variances and mainly positive covariance. Hence, it appears
beneficial to use a shrinkage target which incorporates this knowledge, such as the single-
index covariance matrix. Nevertheless, we include this estimator.
CHAPTER 3
RESULTS
INPUT IMAGE:
(Snap Shots in colour)
Figure 1: Ground pixels of the grass class are outlined with a white rectangle
OUPUT IMAGE 1:
(Snap Shots in colour)
Figure 2: Estimation of eigen values
OUTPUT IMAGE 2:
(Snap Shots in colour)
Figure 3: Estimation of variance along eigen vector dimensions
CHAPTER 4
CONCLUSION
We have proposed a novel method for covariance estimation of high dimensional data.
The new method is based on constrained maximum likelihood (ML) estimation in which
the eigenvector transformation is constrained to be the composition of K Givens rotations.
This model seems to capture the essential behavior of the data with a relatively small
number of parameters. The constraint set is a K dimensional manifold in the space of
orthonormal transforms, but since it is not a linear space; the resulting ML estimation
optimization problem does not yield a closed form global optimum. However, we show
that a recursive local optimization procedure is simple, intuitive, and yields good results.
We also demonstrate that the proposed SMT covariance estimation method substantially
reduces the error in the covariance estimate as compared to current state-of-the-art
estimates for a standard hyper-spectral data set.
REFERENCES
[1] T. Hastie, R. Tibshirani, and J. Friedman, The Elements of StatisticalLearning:
Data Mining, Inference and Prediction, 2nd ed. NewYork:Springer, 2009.
[2] D. L. Donoho, High-dimensional data analysis: The curses and blessingsof
dimensionality, in Math Challenges of the 21st Century. LosAngeles, CA: American
Mathematical Society, Aug. 8, 2000.
[3] R. E. Bellman, Adaptive Control Processes. Princeton, NJ: PrincetonUniv. Press,
1961.
[4] A. K. Jain, R. P. Duin, and J. Mao, Statistical pattern recognition: Areview, IEEE
Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., vol. 22, no. 1, pp.437, Jan. 2000.
[5] P. N. Belhumeur, J. P. Hespanha, and D. J. Kriegman, Eigenfacesversus
fisherfaces: Recognition using class specific linear projection,IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal.
Mach. Intell., vol. 19, no. 7, pp. 711720,Jul. 1997.
[6] J. Theiler, Quantitative comparison of quadratic covariance-basedanomalous change
detectors, Appl. Opt., vol. 47, no. 28, pp. F12F26,2008.
[7] C. Stein, B. Efron, and C. Morris, Improving the usual estimator of anormal
covariance matrix, Dept. of Statistics, Stanford Univ., Report37, 1972.
[8] K. Fukunaga, Introduction to Statistical Pattern Recognition, 2nd ed.Norwell, MA:
Academic, 1990.
[9] J. H. Friedman, Regularized discriminant analysis, J. Amer. Stat.Assoc., vol. 84,
no. 405, pp. 165175, 1989.
[10] J. P. Hoffbeck and D. A. Landgrebe, Covariance matrix estimationand
classification with limited training data, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal.Mach. Intell., vol. 18,
no. 7, pp. 763767, Jul. 1996.
[11] M. J. Daniels and R. E. Kass, Shrinkage estimators for covariancematrices,
Biometrics, vol. 57, no. 4, pp. 11731184, 2001.
[12] O. Ledoit and M. Wolf, A well-conditioned estimator for large-
dimensionalcovariance matrices, J. Multivar.Anal., vol. 88, no. 2, pp.365411, 2004.
[13] J. Schafer and K. Strimmer, A shrinkage approach to large-scale
covariancematrix estimation and implications for functional genomics,Stat. Appl.
Genet.Molecular Biol., vol. 4, no. 1, 2005.