Bootstrapping the Cross-Validation Estimate

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2307.00260v1
• Date: Sat, 1 Jul 2023 07:50:54 GMT
• Title: Bootstrapping the Cross-Validation Estimate
• Authors: Bryan Cai, Fabio Pellegrini, Menglan Pang, Carl de Moor, Changyu Shen, Vivek Charu, and Lu Tian
• Abstract summary: Cross-validation is a widely used technique for evaluating the performance of prediction models. It is essential to accurately quantify the uncertainty associated with the estimate. This paper proposes a fast bootstrap method that quickly estimates the standard error of the cross-validation estimate.
• Score: 3.5159221757909656
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Cross-validation is a widely used technique for evaluating the performance of prediction models. It helps avoid the optimism bias in error estimates, which can be significant for models built using complex statistical learning algorithms. However, since the cross-validation estimate is a random value dependent on observed data, it is essential to accurately quantify the uncertainty associated with the estimate. This is especially important when comparing the performance of two models using cross-validation, as one must determine whether differences in error estimates are a result of chance fluctuations. Although various methods have been developed for making inferences on cross-validation estimates, they often have many limitations, such as stringent model assumptions This paper proposes a fast bootstrap method that quickly estimates the standard error of the cross-validation estimate and produces valid confidence intervals for a population parameter measuring average model performance. Our method overcomes the computational challenge inherent in bootstrapping the cross-validation estimate by estimating the variance component within a random effects model. It is just as flexible as the cross-validation procedure itself. To showcase the effectiveness of our approach, we employ comprehensive simulations and real data analysis across three diverse applications.

Related papers

• Predictive Performance Test based on the Exhaustive Nested Cross-Validation for High-dimensional data [7.62566998854384]
  Cross-validation is used for several tasks such as estimating the prediction error, tuning the regularization parameter, and selecting the most suitable predictive model. The K-fold cross-validation is a popular CV method but its limitation is that the risk estimates are highly dependent on the partitioning of the data. This study presents an alternative novel predictive performance test and valid confidence intervals based on exhaustive nested cross-validation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-06T12:28:16Z)
• Distributional bias compromises leave-one-out cross-validation [0.6656737591902598]
  Cross-validation is a common method for estimating the predictive performance of machine learning models. We show that an approach called "leave-one-out cross-validation" creates a negative correlation between the average label of each training fold and the label of its corresponding test instance. We propose a generalizable rebalanced cross-validation approach that corrects for distributional bias.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-03T15:47:34Z)
• Rigorous Assessment of Model Inference Accuracy using Language Cardinality [5.584832154027001]
  We develop a systematic approach that minimizes bias and uncertainty in model accuracy assessment by replacing statistical estimation with deterministic accuracy measures. We experimentally demonstrate the consistency and applicability of our approach by assessing the accuracy of models inferred by state-of-the-art inference tools.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-29T21:03:26Z)
• Exploring validation metrics for offline model-based optimisation with diffusion models [50.404829846182764]
  In model-based optimisation (MBO) we are interested in using machine learning to design candidates that maximise some measure of reward with respect to a black box function called the (ground truth) oracle. While an approximation to the ground oracle can be trained and used in place of it during model validation to measure the mean reward over generated candidates, the evaluation is approximate and vulnerable to adversarial examples. This is encapsulated under our proposed evaluation framework which is also designed to measure extrapolation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-19T16:57:37Z)
• 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)
• Assessment of Treatment Effect Estimators for Heavy-Tailed Data [70.72363097550483]
  A central obstacle in the objective assessment of treatment effect (TE) estimators in randomized control trials (RCTs) is the lack of ground truth (or validation set) to test their performance. We provide a novel cross-validation-like methodology to address this challenge. We evaluate our methodology across 709 RCTs implemented in the Amazon supply chain.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-12-14T17:53:01Z)
• Scalable Personalised Item Ranking through Parametric Density Estimation [53.44830012414444]
  Learning from implicit feedback is challenging because of the difficult nature of the one-class problem. Most conventional methods use a pairwise ranking approach and negative samplers to cope with the one-class problem. We propose a learning-to-rank approach, which achieves convergence speed comparable to the pointwise counterpart.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-11T03:38:16Z)
• 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)
• Approximate Cross-validated Mean Estimates for Bayesian Hierarchical Regression Models [6.824747267214373]
  We introduce a novel procedure for obtaining cross-validated predictive estimates for Bayesian hierarchical regression models. We provide theoretical results and demonstrate its efficacy on publicly available data and in simulations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-29T00:00:20Z)
• Efficient Ensemble Model Generation for Uncertainty Estimation with Bayesian Approximation in Segmentation [74.06904875527556]
  We propose a generic and efficient segmentation framework to construct ensemble segmentation models. In the proposed method, ensemble models can be efficiently generated by using the layer selection method. We also devise a new pixel-wise uncertainty loss, which improves the predictive performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-21T16:08:38Z)
• Machine learning for causal inference: on the use of cross-fit estimators [77.34726150561087]
  Doubly-robust cross-fit estimators have been proposed to yield better statistical properties. We conducted a simulation study to assess the performance of several estimators for the average causal effect (ACE) When used with machine learning, the doubly-robust cross-fit estimators substantially outperformed all of the other estimators in terms of bias, variance, and confidence interval coverage.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-21T23:09:55Z)

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.