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.

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

Subsampling Bias and The Best-Discrepancy Systematic Cross Validation

A type of balanced repeated half sampling cross validations

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

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

Cross-validation: what does it estimate and how well does it do it?

Overview of model validation for survival regression model with competing risks using melanoma study data

A Comparative Study of the Use of Stratified Cross-Validation and Distribution-Balanced Stratified Cross-Validation in Imbalanced Learning

A survey of cross-validation procedures for model selection

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

External validation of machine learning models - registered models and adaptive sample splitting

Reshuffling Resampling Splits Can Improve Generalization of Hyperparameter Optimization

Bootstrapping the Cross-Validation Estimate

Machine learning algorithm validation with a limited sample size

RESAMPLING METHODS FOR A RELIABLE VALIDATION SET IN DEEP LEARNING BASED POINT CLOUD CLASSIFICATION

Is K-fold cross validation the best model selection method for Machine Learning?

Don't Waste Your Time: Early Stopping Cross-Validation

An Efficient Data Partitioning to Improve Classification Performance While Keeping Parameters Interpretable

Model Selection by Balanced 7×2 Crossvalidation

Impact of train/test sample regimen on performance estimate stability of machine learning in cardiovascular imaging

Bootstrapping the Out-of-sample Predictions for Efficient and Accurate Cross-Validation