Md. Asif Uddin
    I.1.X03

    What the intercept buys

    gradient▲▲△

    Repeat the derivation of I.1.B03 for the two-parameter model y^=wx+b\hat{y} = wx + b. Derive both partial derivatives, set them to zero, solve for ww and bb on the same three points (1,2),(2,4),(3,5)(1,2), (2,4), (3,5), and compare the optimal loss with the through-origin fit.

    Hint

    Setting ∂L/∂b=0\partial \loss/\partial b = 0 first gives bb in terms of ww and the means. Substituting that back leaves one equation in ww.

    Solution

    Step 1 — the two partials. With ri=wxi+b−yir_i = wx_i + b - y_i and L=12n∑ri2\loss = \frac{1}{2n}\sum r_i^2:

    ∂L∂w=1n∑ixiri,∂L∂b=1n∑iri\frac{\partial \loss}{\partial w} = \frac1n \sum_i x_i r_i, \qquad \frac{\partial \loss}{\partial b} = \frac1n \sum_i r_i

    The second is the first with xix_i replaced by 11 — which is exactly right, since the bias is the weight on a constant input of 11. That is worth remembering: a bias is not a special kind of parameter, only a weight whose feature happens to be constant.

    Step 2 — the normal equations. Setting both to zero:

    w∑xi2+b∑xi=∑xiyi,w∑xi+nb=∑yiw\sum x_i^2 + b\sum x_i = \sum x_i y_i, \qquad w\sum x_i + nb = \sum y_i

    Step 3 — the sums.

    n=3,∑xi=6,∑yi=11,∑xiyi=25,∑xi2=14n = 3, \quad \textstyle\sum x_i = 6, \quad \sum y_i = 11, \quad \sum x_i y_i = 25, \quad \sum x_i^2 = 14

    Step 4 — solve. Eliminating bb gives the standard form

    w=n∑xiyi−∑xi∑yin∑xi2−(∑xi)2=3(25)−(6)(11)3(14)−36=75−6642−36=96=1.5000w = \frac{n\sum x_iy_i - \sum x_i \sum y_i}{n\sum x_i^2 - (\sum x_i)^2} = \frac{3(25) - (6)(11)}{3(14) - 36} = \frac{75 - 66}{42 - 36} = \frac{9}{6} = 1.5000

    and then from the second equation

    b=∑yi−w∑xin=11−(1.5)(6)3=23=0.6667b = \frac{\sum y_i - w\sum x_i}{n} = \frac{11 - (1.5)(6)}{3} = \frac{2}{3} = 0.6667

    Step 5 — the residuals and the loss.

    r1=+0.1667,r2=−0.3333,r3=+0.1667r_1 = +0.1667, \qquad r_2 = -0.3333, \qquad r_3 = +0.1667

    L=16(0.0278+0.1111+0.0278)=0.0278\loss = \frac{1}{6}\big(0.0278 + 0.1111 + 0.0278\big) = 0.0278

    against 0.05950.0595 for the through-origin fit of I.1.B03.

    What the intercept bought. The loss more than halved, from 0.05950.0595 to 0.02780.0278. But notice something sharper in the residuals: they sum to 0.1667−0.3333+0.1667=0.00000.1667 - 0.3333 + 0.1667 = 0.0000. That is not a coincidence — it is exactly what ∂L/∂b=0\partial\loss/\partial b = 0 says. A fitted intercept forces the mean residual to zero. The through-origin model has no such constraint, and its residuals do not sum to zero.

    So the intercept did not merely add flexibility; it added a specific, nameable property to the fit. That is the honest way to describe what any parameter buys.

    Draws on