Abstract:Model validation is the most important part of building a supervised model. For building a model with good generalization performance one must have a sensible data splitting strategy, and this is crucial for model validation. In this study, we conducted a comparative study on various reported data splitting methods. The MixSim model was employed to generate nine simulated datasets with different probabilities of mis-classification and variable sample sizes. Then partial least squares for discriminant analysis and support vector machines for classification were applied to these datasets. Data splitting methods tested included variants of cross-validation, bootstrapping, bootstrapped Latin partition, Kennard-Stone algorithm (K-S) and sample set partitioning based on joint X–Y distances algorithm (SPXY). These methods were employed to split the data into training and validation sets. The estimated generalization performances from the validation sets were then compared with the ones obtained from the blind test sets which were generated from the same distribution but were unseen by the training/validation procedure used in model construction. The results showed that the size of the data is the deciding factor for the qualities of the generalization performance estimated from the validation set. We found that there was a significant gap between the performance estimated from the validation set and the one from the test set for the all the data splitting methods employed on small datasets. Such disparity decreased when more samples were available for training/validation, and this is because the models were then moving towards approximations of the central limit theory for the simulated datasets used. We also found that having too many or too few samples in the training set had a negative effect on the estimated model performance, suggesting that it is necessary to have a good balance between the sizes of training set and validation set to have a reliable estimation of model performance. We also found that systematic sampling method such as K-S and SPXY generally had very poor estimation of the model performance, most likely due to the fact that they are designed to take the most representative samples first and thus left a rather poorly representative sample set for model performance estimation.

Blocked 3×2 Cross-Validated T-Test for Comparing Supervised Classification Learning Algorithms

Block-regularized 5$\times$2 Cross-validated McNemar's Test for Comparing Two Classification Algorithms

Block-Regularized M × 2 Cross-Validated Estimator of the Generalization Error

An Improved Cross-Validated Adversarial Validation Method.

Tuning Parameter Selection Based on Blocked $$3\times 2$$ Cross-Validation for High-Dimensional Linear Regression Model

Confidence Interval for Measure of Algorithm Performance Based on Blocked 3 2 Cross-Validation

Testing Rankings with Cross-Validation

Subsampling Bias and The Best-Discrepancy Systematic Cross Validation

Block-regularized Repeated Learning-Testing for Estimating Generalization Error

Impact Analysis of Classification Performance for Cross-Validation of Imbalance Spliting Data

Blocked Cross-Validation: A Precise and Efficient Method for Hyperparameter Tuning

Bayes Test of Precision, Recall, and F-1 Measure for Comparison of Two Natural Language Processing Models

Is Cross-Validation the Gold Standard to Evaluate Model Performance?

A New Kind of Nonparametric Test for Statistical Comparison of Multiple Classifiers over Multiple Datasets

A type of balanced repeated half sampling cross validations

A Link between Coding Theory and Cross-Validation with Applications

On The Smoothness of Cross-Validation-Based Estimators Of Classifier Performance

The Limits of Assumption-free Tests for Algorithm Performance

On Splitting Training and Validation Set: A Comparative Study of Cross-Validation, Bootstrap and Systematic Sampling for Estimating the Generalization Performance of Supervised Learning

Permutation Test for Validation of Binary Regression Models

Model Selection by Balanced 7×2 Crossvalidation