  In statistical prediction, classical approaches for model selection and model
evaluation based on covariance penalties are still widely used. Most of the
literature on this topic is based on what we call the "Fixed-X" assumption,
where covariate values are assumed to be nonrandom. By contrast, it is often
more reasonable to take a "Random-X" view, where the covariate values are
independently drawn for both training and prediction. To study the
applicability of covariance penalties in this setting, we propose a
decomposition of Random-X prediction error in which the randomness in the
covariates contributes to both the bias and variance components. This
decomposition is general, but we concentrate on the fundamental case of least
squares regression. We prove that in this setting the move from Fixed-X to
Random-X prediction results in an increase in both bias and variance. When the
covariates are normally distributed and the linear model is unbiased, all terms
in this decomposition are explicitly computable, which yields an extension of
Mallows' Cp that we call $RCp$. $RCp$ also holds asymptotically for certain
classes of nonnormal covariates. When the noise variance is unknown, plugging
in the usual unbiased estimate leads to an approach that we call $\hat{RCp}$,
which is closely related to Sp (Tukey 1967), and GCV (Craven and Wahba 1978).
For excess bias, we propose an estimate based on the "shortcut-formula" for
ordinary cross-validation (OCV), resulting in an approach we call $RCp^+$.
Theoretical arguments and numerical simulations suggest that $RCP^+$ is
typically superior to OCV, though the difference is small. We further examine
the Random-X error of other popular estimators. The surprising result we get
for ridge regression is that, in the heavily-regularized regime, Random-X
variance is smaller than Fixed-X variance, which can lead to smaller overall
Random-X error.
