Cross-validation is a special case of the validation set approach.

Question

BlackTom AI · Accepted Answer

The statement to evaluate is: 'Cross-validation is a special case of the validation set approach.'

Because no answer options are provided, we examine the claim on its own terms and contrast the two concepts.

First, consider what the validation set approach typically entails: you randomly partition the data once into a training set and a separate validation (or test) set. You train on the training portion and evaluate on the fixed validation portion. This yields a single estimate of model performance, and its reliability depends on that one split.

Next, consider cross-validation: in k-fold cross-validation, the data are split into k equally sized folds. The model is trained k times, each time using k-1 folds for training and the remaining fold for validation, and the performance estimates are averaged across the k trials. There are also variations like leave-one-out cross-validation, which is a specific case where k equals the number of observations.

From these descriptions, cross-validation is not a special case of the validation-set approach. Rather, it is a distinct methodology that generalizes the idea of validation by using multiple splits and aggregating results to obtain a more stable performance estimate. The validation-set approach provides a single split and a single evaluation, whereas cross-validation provides multiple splits and an averaged evaluation.

A common misconception might be to think cross-validation simply refers to a particular fixed validation split, which would then make it seem like a subset or variant of a single-split approach. However, the defining feature of cross-validation is the repetitive resampling and averaging across folds, which goes beyond a single validation split.

Another potential confusion is to equate cross-validation with leave-one-out cross-validation or with other resampling strategies. While these are both forms of cross-validation, they are still fundamentally different from the standard one-shot validation-set method because they involve multiple training/validation cycles instead of one.

In summary, the key distinction is that the validation set approach uses one split for evaluation, while cross-validation uses multiple splits and aggregates results. Therefore, the statement that cross-validation is a special case of the validation set approach is inaccurate.

QBUS6810 (ND) Week 6 Quiz

Cross-validation is a special case of the validation set approach.

View Explanation

Log in for full answers

Similar Questions

In a 75%/25% Cross-Validation

Please select the incorrect statements about k-fold cross-validation and Leave-One-Out Cross-Validation (LOOCV):

Assuming doing a 10-fold cross validation for linear regression (Y = AX + B). It is possible that 10 different As and Bs would be generated, one for each model learned.

Suppose we are going to perform K-fold cross-validation. If we make 5 folds from the data set that has 100 observations. Which of the following are true statements?

Which of the following approaches is best when deciding what model to use, e.g. when deciding what polynomial degree to use in regression?

In a consumer society, many adults channel creativity into buying things

Economic stress and unpredictable times have resulted in a booming industry for self-help products

People born without creativity never can develop it

More Practical Tools for Students Powered by AI Study Helper

Homework AI Solver

Stylized AI Paper Writer

Plagiarism Checker Assistant

Citation AI Academic Writing Tool

In-Class Translation Assistant

AI Note Generator

AI Quiz Answers

Past Exam Questions from University Test Bank

Smart Practice Assistant

Adaptive Practice

Making Your Study Simpler