Confidence intervals for the Cox model test error from cross-validation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2201.10770v1
• Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2022 06:40:43 GMT
• Title: Confidence intervals for the Cox model test error from cross-validation
• Authors: Min Woo Sun, Robert Tibshirani
• Abstract summary: Cross-validation (CV) is one of the most widely used techniques in statistical learning for estimating the test error of a model. Standard confidence intervals for test error using estimates from CV may have coverage below nominal levels. One way to this issue is by estimating the mean squared error of the prediction error instead using nested CV.
• Score: 91.3755431537592
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Cross-validation (CV) is one of the most widely used techniques in statistical learning for estimating the test error of a model, but its behavior is not yet fully understood. It has been shown that standard confidence intervals for test error using estimates from CV may have coverage below nominal levels. This phenomenon occurs because each sample is used in both the training and testing procedures during CV and as a result, the CV estimates of the errors become correlated. Without accounting for this correlation, the estimate of the variance is smaller than it should be. One way to mitigate this issue is by estimating the mean squared error of the prediction error instead using nested CV. This approach has been shown to achieve superior coverage compared to intervals derived from standard CV. In this work, we generalize the nested CV idea to the Cox proportional hazards model and explore various choices of test error for this setting.

Related papers

• Is K-fold cross validation the best model selection method for Machine Learning? [0.0]
  K-fold cross-validation is the most common approach to ascertaining the likelihood that a machine learning outcome is generated by chance. A novel test based on K-fold CV and the Upper Bound of the actual error (K-fold CUBV) is composed.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-29T18:46:53Z)
• The Implicit Delta Method [61.36121543728134]
  In this paper, we propose an alternative, the implicit delta method, which works by infinitesimally regularizing the training loss of uncertainty. We show that the change in the evaluation due to regularization is consistent for the variance of the evaluation estimator, even when the infinitesimal change is approximated by a finite difference.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-11T19:34:17Z)
• Cross-validation: what does it estimate and how well does it do it? [2.049702429898688]
  Cross-validation is a widely-used technique to estimate prediction error, but its behavior is complex and not fully understood. We prove that this is not the case for the linear model fit by ordinary least squares; rather it estimates the average prediction error of models fit on other unseen training sets drawn from the same population.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-01T17:58:54Z)
• Learning from Similarity-Confidence Data [94.94650350944377]
  We investigate a novel weakly supervised learning problem of learning from similarity-confidence (Sconf) data. We propose an unbiased estimator of the classification risk that can be calculated from only Sconf data and show that the estimation error bound achieves the optimal convergence rate.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-02-13T07:31:16Z)
• When to Impute? Imputation before and during cross-validation [0.0]
  Cross-validation (CV) is a technique used to estimate generalization error for prediction models. It has been recommended the entire sequence of steps be carried out during each replicate of CV to mimic the application of the entire pipeline to an external testing set.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-01T23:04:16Z)
• Rademacher upper bounds for cross-validation errors with an application to the lasso [6.837167110907022]
  We establish a general upper bound for $K$-fold cross-validation ($K$-CV) errors. The CV error upper bound applies to both light-tail and heavy-tail error distributions. We provide a Python package for computing the CV error upper bound in $K$-CV-based algorithms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-30T17:13:03Z)
• Cross-validation Confidence Intervals for Test Error [83.67415139421448]
  This work develops central limit theorems for crossvalidation and consistent estimators of its variance under weak stability conditions on the learning algorithm. Results are the first of their kind for the popular choice of leave-one-out cross-validation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-24T17:40:06Z)
• Calibration of Neural Networks using Splines [51.42640515410253]
  Measuring calibration error amounts to comparing two empirical distributions. We introduce a binning-free calibration measure inspired by the classical Kolmogorov-Smirnov (KS) statistical test. Our method consistently outperforms existing methods on KS error as well as other commonly used calibration measures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-23T07:18:05Z)
• Good Classifiers are Abundant in the Interpolating Regime [64.72044662855612]
  We develop a methodology to compute precisely the full distribution of test errors among interpolating classifiers. We find that test errors tend to concentrate around a small typical value $varepsilon*$, which deviates substantially from the test error of worst-case interpolating model. Our results show that the usual style of analysis in statistical learning theory may not be fine-grained enough to capture the good generalization performance observed in practice.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-22T21:12:31Z)
• Estimating the Prediction Performance of Spatial Models via Spatial k-Fold Cross Validation [1.7205106391379026]
  In machine learning one often assumes the data are independent when evaluating model performance. spatial autocorrelation (SAC) causes the standard cross validation (CV) methods to produce optimistically biased prediction performance estimates. We propose a modified version of the CV method called spatial k-fold cross validation (SKCV) which provides a useful estimate for model prediction performance without optimistic bias due to SAC.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-28T19:55:18Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.