ML Interview Q Series: We are tasked with estimating Airbnb rental prices. Out of linear regression and random forest regression, which one is more likely to offer superior results and why?
📚 Browse the full ML Interview series here.
Comprehensive Explanation
Linear Regression Overview
Linear regression is one of the most fundamental techniques for supervised learning when the target variable is continuous. In its most standard form, it assumes that the relationship between input features and the target is linear. This can be captured by a formula like:
Here, y is the model’s prediction for the booking price, x_i are the input features such as location, number of bedrooms, amenities count, etc., w_i are the learned weights that represent how important each feature is, and b is a bias or intercept term. Model training typically aims to minimize the difference between predicted values and true values of the training set. One common measure of this difference is the mean squared error (MSE):
Where N is the total number of training examples, y_i is the actual booking price for the i-th example, and hat{y}_i is the predicted price for that i-th example.
Strengths of Linear Regression
Simplicity and Interpretability. It is straightforward to interpret which feature has what kind of impact on the outcome, because the weights can be analyzed directly.
Fast Training. The model is computationally efficient to fit, especially with analytic solutions or using gradient-based methods for large data.
Low Variance. Linear regression tends to have relatively low variance, making it less prone to drastic overfitting on small or moderate-sized datasets.
Limitations of Linear Regression
Linear Assumption. It strictly assumes a linear relationship between features and target. Real-world booking price data often involve non-trivial interactions or non-linearity.
Sensitive to Outliers. Outliers can heavily influence the learned weights and thus skew predictions.
Feature Engineering Requirements. Often, we need domain knowledge to capture non-linear patterns (e.g., polynomial terms, log transforms) or interactions between features.
Random Forest Regression Overview
Random forest is an ensemble learning method that aggregates the outputs of multiple decision trees, each of which is trained on random subsets of data and features. For regression tasks, the random forest typically averages the predictions of all individual trees:
Where T is the number of decision trees in the forest, and hat{y}_t(x) is the prediction of the t-th tree.
Strengths of Random Forest Regression
Ability to Model Complex Relationships. Random forests can capture complex, non-linear relationships because each tree can learn intricate patterns.
Robust to Outliers. Decision trees are not as sensitive to outliers as linear methods. The ensemble nature further mitigates the effect of extreme observations.
Reduced Risk of Overfitting. Although individual trees can overfit, combining many trees usually reduces variance and stabilizes predictions.
Feature Importance Estimates. Random forests can provide estimates of feature importance that can help interpret which variables carry the most predictive power, albeit not as simply as in linear regression.
Limitations of Random Forest Regression
Less Interpretable. While feature importance helps, the model’s internal decision-making is generally more opaque than linear regression.
Higher Computational Cost. Training a large number of deep trees can be expensive in terms of memory and computation time.
Potential Overfitting with Insufficient Tuning. If hyperparameters (like max depth, minimum samples per leaf) are not tuned properly, random forests can still overfit on noisy data.
Why Random Forest Regression Often Performs Better for Booking Prices
Airbnb listing prices usually depend on a multitude of interacting factors (e.g., location plus proximity to tourist attractions, or number of bedrooms plus certain amenities). These interactions typically lead to non-linear and more complex relationships. Linear regression, with its strict linear form, may not capture all these nuances unless extensive feature engineering is done to model non-linearities and interactions.
In contrast, random forest regression inherently models non-linearity and interactions by splitting the feature space in complex ways. It can adapt to heterogeneous data, automatically capturing different regimes of pricing (for instance, very high-end listings vs. average listings) without much domain-specific feature engineering.
Therefore, in a large majority of real-world pricing scenarios, random forests are likely to produce smaller errors because of their ability to flexibly fit non-linear patterns and reduce variance by combining many decision trees.
Potential Follow-Up Questions
How can hyperparameter tuning affect each model’s performance?
Proper hyperparameter tuning can drastically influence both linear regression and random forest regression, though in different ways.
Linear Regression. Usually simpler to tune. Regularization hyperparameters (like lambda in L2 regularization or alpha in L1) can help control overfitting. Feature selection or the addition of polynomial terms also influences model performance.
Random Forest. There are several important hyperparameters, such as number of trees, maximum tree depth, minimum samples per split or per leaf, and the number of features to consider for each split. Tweaking these can help balance the bias-variance trade-off and manage overfitting or underfitting.
When might linear regression be preferred over random forest?
Although random forests are often more accurate, linear regression can be preferable if interpretability and simplicity are paramount or if the dataset is very high-dimensional with a moderate number of data points. In such situations, the high dimensionality might push random forest to overfit (unless carefully regularized), whereas linear regression with regularization might be more stable and simpler to interpret. Additionally, if one must have a linear formula for compliance or business reasons, linear regression’s direct coefficient estimates can be an advantage.
What role does feature engineering play for each approach?
Linear Regression. Heavily relies on how features are represented. If you suspect non-linearity, polynomial features or transformations are necessary to capture complex patterns.
Random Forest. Less reliant on explicit feature engineering for non-linear relationships, though domain knowledge can still help. Variables that can be split into meaningful categories or ordinal structures can further help decision tree-based models. Additionally, ensuring relevant features are included remains important.
How do outliers impact each model?
Linear regression directly fits a line through data points in the best way possible (least squares), so a few extreme outliers can influence the weight parameters significantly. For random forests, each decision tree performs splits in a data-driven manner, so outliers may have a more localized effect and are less likely to drastically impact overall predictions.
Why might random forest training be slower than linear regression?
Training linear regression with standard methods (especially if the feature set is not extremely large) can be comparatively fast because it can be reduced to solving a closed-form equation or running an efficient gradient-based approach. Random forests train multiple decision trees in parallel, but each tree grows by splitting nodes repeatedly. This is computationally more intense, especially with large datasets and many candidate features. Hence, random forest training can be significantly slower than linear regression, though libraries typically parallelize training for efficiency.
Practical Python Snippet
Below is a basic example of how you might implement both models in Python using scikit-learn:
import numpy as np
from sklearn.linear_model import LinearRegression
from sklearn.ensemble import RandomForestRegressor
from sklearn.model_selection import train_test_split
from sklearn.metrics import mean_squared_error
# Sample data (X: features, y: target prices)
X = np.random.rand(1000, 5)
y = 100 + 50*X[:,0] + 20*X[:,1] - 10*X[:,2] + np.random.randn(1000)*5
# Split into training and test sets
X_train, X_test, y_train, y_test = train_test_split(X, y, test_size=0.2, random_state=42)
# Linear Regression
lin_reg = LinearRegression()
lin_reg.fit(X_train, y_train)
y_pred_lin = lin_reg.predict(X_test)
mse_lin = mean_squared_error(y_test, y_pred_lin)
print("MSE (Linear Regression):", mse_lin)
# Random Forest Regressor
rf_reg = RandomForestRegressor(n_estimators=100, random_state=42)
rf_reg.fit(X_train, y_train)
y_pred_rf = rf_reg.predict(X_test)
mse_rf = mean_squared_error(y_test, y_pred_rf)
print("MSE (Random Forest):", mse_rf)
This code creates a simple dataset, fits both a linear regression model and a random forest regressor, and compares MSE. In practice, you would likely perform hyperparameter tuning (e.g., using grid search) on both models.
Could gradient boosting be a better choice?
Gradient boosting often outperforms random forest in structured data tasks because it iteratively optimizes residual errors. However, it is more sensitive to hyperparameter settings and may require more careful tuning. Still, in many booking price prediction problems, gradient boosting (e.g., XGBoost, LightGBM, CatBoost) can yield remarkable accuracy gains over both linear regression and plain random forest, making it a strong contender in practice.
Are there any interpretability techniques for random forest?
While random forest models are typically considered “black boxes,” there are several techniques to interpret them:
Feature Importance. Evaluate how much each feature contributes to reducing impurity across the ensemble.
Partial Dependence Plots. Visualize how the model’s predicted outcome changes with respect to a single feature or feature pair, holding other features at average or median values.
Shapley Values (SHAP). Provide a more granular sense of each feature’s contribution to a given prediction compared to a baseline.
These methods allow you to gain insights into a random forest’s decision-making process, though they are not as straightforward as coefficient-based interpretation in linear regression.
Potential Pitfalls and Edge Cases
Highly Correlated Features. Linear regression struggles with multicollinearity, as it can inflate the variance of the estimated weights. Random forests can handle correlated features better but might lead to certain correlated features appearing more important.
Sparse Data with Very High Dimensions. Linear models with proper regularization might handle this scenario more gracefully. Random forests may need large ensembles and hyperparameter tuning to avoid overfitting.
Data Scarcity. Decision trees can aggressively memorize smaller datasets, so random forests might overfit if each tree is relatively deep and there is not enough data. Linear regression might remain simpler and less variance-prone in very data-scarce scenarios.
Overall, in a typical Airbnb listing scenario, random forest regression generally outperforms linear regression due to its capacity to capture non-linear relationships and interactions among features, especially if you have enough training data and have tuned model hyperparameters effectively.
Below are additional follow-up questions
How should you handle categorical features for both linear regression and random forest?
Real estate listings often contain categorical data: property types (house, apartment), property classification (entire home, shared room), neighborhood or city region, etc. Handling these features effectively is crucial for accurate price predictions.
For linear regression: One-hot encoding or dummy coding is commonly used to represent categorical variables. Each distinct category spawns a binary feature that indicates whether a data point belongs to that category or not. This is typically straightforward, but if the categorical variable has a large number of categories (e.g., neighborhood identifiers with hundreds of unique values), the feature space may balloon. This can lead to increased model complexity or multicollinearity. Regularization helps mitigate these issues, but it can still inflate model size.
For random forest: Decision trees naturally handle categories if they are encoded as numerical values, although label encoding alone might be ambiguous since the model might treat the encoded categories as ordinal. One-hot encoding can still work, but in many implementations, the forest can effectively split on each category if using a suitable library or if the categories are recast as ordinal with caution. Random forests often handle high-cardinality categorical features more gracefully than linear regression, but large cardinalities can still introduce many possible splits and slow down training.
Pitfalls:
If a categorical feature has many rare categories, both models can struggle with limited samples in each category. Pruning or grouping rare categories based on domain knowledge (e.g., grouping neighborhoods) can improve results.
With linear regression, multicollinearity can become problematic when categories overlap or if there are multiple related categorical variables.
What if the dataset is huge and memory constraints become critical?
When dealing with extremely large datasets (potentially millions of rows and many features), both models can become computationally expensive.
For linear regression: In extremely large-scale scenarios, iterative methods such as stochastic gradient descent or mini-batch gradient descent are used. This scales better than attempting to invert large matrices in the normal equation approach. Spark MLlib, for instance, provides distributed implementations that can handle large datasets across a cluster.
For random forest: A naive implementation can be even more demanding, since many large trees are being trained in parallel. Libraries like Spark MLlib or distributed random forests (e.g., XGBoost in distributed mode) can scale horizontally by partitioning data across multiple machines. However, the overhead of communication and synchronization might still be substantial.
Pitfalls:
If the model is not carefully configured with memory usage constraints, out-of-memory errors can occur. Feature selection or dimensionality reduction can mitigate this.
In distributed environments, network I/O and data shuffling can create bottlenecks. Proper cluster configuration, partitioning, and caching strategies help ensure efficient training.
How do you diagnose poor performance for each model?
Both linear regression and random forest can yield suboptimal results for various reasons, and diagnosing the root cause is crucial.
For linear regression:
Investigate residual plots to detect non-linear patterns, heteroskedasticity (i.e., error variance not constant across predictions), or outliers that significantly sway the regression line.
Check variance inflation factors (VIF) or correlation matrices to see if multicollinearity is inflating coefficient variance.
Compare training vs. validation error to identify overfitting or underfitting (although linear regression is less prone to overfitting unless there is an abundance of features or a small dataset).
For random forest:
Examine feature importance to see if the model is ignoring potentially vital predictors.
Evaluate the difference between training and test errors. A large gap suggests overfitting, possibly corrected by reducing max depth or increasing min samples per leaf.
Look for data leakage: random forests can inadvertently memorize spurious correlations if the dataset has mislabeled or artificially engineered features that reveal the target.
Pitfalls:
Relying solely on summary metrics like RMSE may mask issues such as a subset of data (e.g., extremely high-priced properties) performing poorly.
Overly complex random forests might perform very well on training data but suffer on new data.
Could we adapt each method to handle time-dependent aspects of Airbnb pricing?
Airbnb prices are often seasonal, changing based on month, holidays, or events. Incorporating temporal information can boost model accuracy.
For linear regression: One approach is to add time-based features such as month, day of week, or special event flags. Interaction terms between these features and other variables (like location or type of property) might better capture seasonal fluctuations. You might also consider applying techniques similar to time-series modeling (rolling averages or time-lagged features).
For random forest: You can directly include temporal features like month, holiday indicator, or “days until booking date.” The trees will learn splits that isolate different time periods or event-based price spikes. Since random forests handle non-linear relationships well, they often excel at capturing seasonal swings without needing manually designed interaction terms.
Pitfalls:
Time drift: the distribution in older data might differ from current or future data if neighborhoods gentrify or local regulations change. Training with stale data can degrade model performance.
Overfitting historical trends: if you feed the model explicit signals about future data or incorrectly use data from “the future,” the model can appear deceptively accurate but fail in live scenarios.
Does each model impose specific data distribution assumptions, and what if those assumptions are broken?
Linear regression: Classical linear regression relies on several assumptions: linearity of relationship, independence of errors, homoscedasticity (constant variance of errors), and normality of residuals. In real Airbnb scenarios, these assumptions might be violated, especially if price distributions are skewed (some extremely high-priced luxury listings), or if the variance grows with the listing’s size.
Random forest: It does not mandate strict parametric assumptions. It can capture heteroscedasticity and non-linearity. However, it still relies on independent and identically distributed (i.i.d.) training samples. If the data is distributed in a non-stationary manner, or if certain subsets of data behave differently, the model may have trouble generalizing.
Pitfalls:
For linear regression, ignoring violation of assumptions can lead to biased or inconsistent estimates, especially if the data is heavily skewed or has strong outliers.
Even though random forest is more flexible, if data is sampled from multiple distributions that differ significantly, you might need domain-driven segmentation or more specialized modeling.
Should features be scaled or standardized for each model, and when can ignoring scaling cause issues?
Linear regression: While ordinary least squares solutions do not strictly require feature scaling, it is typically recommended when applying certain solvers or regularization (e.g., gradient descent, L1/L2). If features vary drastically in scale, it can make gradient-based optimization slower or less stable. For interpretability, though, unscaled features let the coefficients directly correspond to original feature units.
Random forest: Decision trees make splits by comparing feature values to thresholds, so scaling does not fundamentally affect the splitting mechanism. As a result, random forests usually do not need feature scaling. However, if you plan to combine random forests with methods sensitive to feature scale (e.g., distance-based methods or gradient-based optimization in hybrid models), scaling might still be relevant.
Pitfalls:
Failing to scale can slow down convergence in linear regression’s gradient-based training.
Over-scaling for tree-based methods can be an unnecessary overhead and does not necessarily improve performance.
Which model is more robust to highly correlated features?
Linear regression: Highly correlated (multicollinear) features can cause instability in coefficient estimates, making them large in magnitude or changing signs unexpectedly. This leads to inflated variance of the coefficient estimates. Regularization methods like Ridge (L2) or Lasso (L1) can reduce these effects, but carefully diagnosing correlation remains crucial.
Random forest: It tends to handle correlated features more gracefully because different trees will randomly select subsets of features, distributing the weight among correlated predictors. That said, correlated features may reduce the overall efficiency of the forest since many of its splits are effectively redundant, and it can also dilute the relative feature importance metrics.
Pitfalls:
Even though random forests are more tolerant, extreme correlation can still degrade interpretability because it may be unclear which feature truly influences the outcome.
For linear models, ignoring correlation can lead to very misleading interpretations of coefficients.
How do you address imbalanced or skewed distribution of prices?
Airbnb listings often follow a skewed distribution: many moderately priced listings and relatively fewer luxury or extremely cheap properties.
For linear regression: Some practitioners apply a log transform on the target to compress the scale of higher values. This can help satisfy linear regression assumptions regarding residual distributions and homoscedasticity. Feature transformations or robust regression methods can also alleviate skewness.
For random forest: It automatically adapts to different ranges by building splits around relevant thresholds. However, if extremely high prices are rare outliers, the random forest might only see a handful of them during training. Sub-sampling or using specialized objective functions (like quantile regression forests) may help model the tail of the distribution more effectively.
Pitfalls:
If you apply a log transform, you must remember to invert the predictions (exponentiate them) before comparing to actual prices. Any errors in the log domain can be magnified when returned to the original scale.
For random forest, if you ignore the tail entirely, the model might systematically underestimate extremely high prices.
Can you combine linear regression and random forest for better results?
A hybrid approach sometimes outperforms a single model. For instance, you might:
Use linear regression to capture broad global trends, then feed its predictions or residuals into a random forest that handles non-linear patterns and interactions.
Ensemble the two models by averaging or stacking their predictions. Stacking uses meta-learners (another model) that learns how best to combine predictions.
Pitfalls:
Increased complexity in model training and deployment since you maintain two separate models or a more elaborate pipeline.
Risk of overfitting if the stacked model is not carefully regularized or if you have insufficient data to robustly train the meta-learner.
What if you have multiple related targets, like both booking price and occupancy rate?
In practice, hosts or platforms might want to predict multiple outcomes (e.g., nightly price and expected occupancy) together, as they are often correlated.
For linear regression: You can adopt a multi-output linear regression approach or train separate single-output regressions. Training a single linear model that includes both targets in a joint error function might leverage correlations between them if the covariance structure is well captured.
For random forest: Random forest can also be extended to multi-output. Each tree can provide multiple predictions (one for each target). This can exploit shared structure in the feature space, though it is computationally more demanding. In many frameworks, multi-output regression is supported by building trees that split based on combined variance of all targets at each node.
Pitfalls:
If the correlation between the targets is weak, forcing a multi-output model might degrade results for each individual prediction compared to single-target models.
Overfitting can become more pronounced if you add multiple targets, particularly if some targets have fewer data points with labels. Ensuring enough coverage of all target labels is critical.