An international group of mathematicians led by Lehigh University statistician Taeho Kim has developed a new way to generate predictions that line up more closely with real-world results. Their method is aimed at improving forecasting across many areas of science, particularly in health research, biology and the social sciences.
The researchers call their technique the Maximum Agreement Linear Predictor, or MALP. Its central goal is to enhance how well predicted values match observed ones. MALP does this by maximizing the Concordance Correlation Coefficient, or CCC. This statistical measure evaluates how pairs of numbers fall along the 45-degree line in a scatter plot, reflecting both precision (how tightly the points cluster) and accuracy (how close they are to that line). Traditional approaches, including the widely used least-squares method, typically try to reduce average error. Although effective in many situations, these methods can miss the mark when the main objective is to ensure strong alignment between predictions and actual values, says Kim, assistant professor of mathematics.
"Sometimes, we don't just want our predictions to be close -- we want them to have the highest agreement with the real values," Kim explains. "The issue is, how can we define the agreement of two objects in a scientifically meaningful way? One way we can conceptualize this is how close the points are aligned with a 45 degree line on a scatter plot between the predicted value and the actual values. So, if the scatter plot of these shows a strong alignment with this 45 degree line, then we could say there is a good level of agreement between these two."
Why Agreement Matters More Than Simple Correlation
According to Kim, people often think first of Pearson's correlation coefficient when they hear the word agreement, since it is introduced early in statistics education and remains a fundamental tool. Pearson's method measures the strength of a linear relationship between two variables, but it does not specifically check whether the relationship aligns with the 45-degree line. For instance, it can detect strong correlations for lines that tilt at 50 degrees or 75 degrees, as long as the data points lie close to a straight line, Kim says.
"In our case, we are specifically interested in alignment with a 45-degree line. For that, we use a different measure: the concordance correlation coefficient, introduced by Lin in 1989. This metric focuses specifically on how well the data align with a 45-degree line. What we've developed is a predictor designed to maximize the concordance correlation between predicted values and actual values."
Testing MALP With Eye Scans and Body Measurements
To evaluate how well MALP performs, the team ran tests using both simulated data and real measurements, including eye scans and body fat assessments. One study applied MALP to data from an ophthalmology project comparing two types of optical coherence tomography (OCT) devices: the older Stratus OCT and the newer Cirrus OCT. As medical centers move to the Cirrus system, doctors need a dependable way to translate measurements so they can compare results over time. Using high-quality images from 26 left eyes and 30 right eyes, the researchers examined how accurately MALP could predict Stratus OCT readings from Cirrus OCT measurements and compared its performance with the least-squares method. MALP produced predictions that aligned more closely with the true Stratus values, while least squares slightly outperformed MALP in reducing average error, highlighting a tradeoff between agreement and error minimization.
The team also looked at a body fat data set from 252 adults that included weight, abdomen size and other body measurements. Direct measures of body fat percentage, such as underwater weighing, are reliable but expensive, so easier measurements are often substituted. MALP was used to estimate body fat percentage and was evaluated against the least-squares method. The results were similar to the eye scan study: MALP delivered predictions that more closely matched real values, while least squares again had slightly lower average errors. This repeated pattern underscored the ongoing balance between agreement and minimizing error.
Choosing the Right Tool for the Right Task
... continue reading