In a 75%/25% Cross-Validation

Question

BlackTom AI · Accepted Answer

Starting with the question: 'In a 75%/25% Cross-Validation', we need to evaluate what this cross-validation scheme entails and examine each offered option.
Option 1: 'The model is developed on 25% of the data, and tested on the other 75%.' This describes a 25% training and 75% testing split, which is the inverse of a 75%/25% cross-validation. In standard 75%/25% cross-validation, we would expect the training set to be 75% and the test set to be 25%. Therefore this option misstates the typical arrangement and is incorrect.
Option 2: 'If the AIC is less than 2%, you have negative shrinkage.' AIC (Akaike Information Criterion) values are used to compare models, with lower AIC indicating a better trade-off between fit and complexity. The statement about 'AIC less than 2%' and 'negative shrinkage' introduces terminology that is not standard for AIC interpretation and mischaracterizes shrinkage concepts; shrinkage is a term associated with regularization or bias-variance trade-offs, not something tied to a fixed 'less than 2% AIC' threshold. This makes the claim incorrect or at least misleading.
Option 3: 'if the shrinkage in R2 is greater than 2%, the cross-validation is successful' This option ties cross-validation success to a specific threshold in R-squared shrinkage, which is not a standard or universally accepted criterion for assessing cross-validation success. Shrinkage of R2 is not a widely used or agreed-upon rule for evaluating cross-validation performance; cross-validation success is usually judged by predictive error or stability across folds, not a fixed 'greater than 2%' shrinkage in R2. Therefore, this statement is not a reliable or correct characterization.
Option 4: 'The model is developed on 75% of the data, and tested on the other 25%' This aligns with the conventional interpretation of a 75%/25% cross-validation setup: training occurs on 75% of the data, and evaluation is conducted on the remaining 25%. It reflects the standard practice for this split and is consistent with how cross-validation partitions are commonly described. This makes the statement correct in the context of a 75%/25% cross-validation scheme.
In summary, the first option reverses the split, the second and third introduce inaccurate or misleading criteria related to AIC and R2 shrinkage, while the fourth correctly describes the intended data partitioning for a 75%/25% cross-validation.

In a 75%/25% Cross-ValidationSingle choice

Similar Questions

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.

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

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?

Question at position 1 A firm competing in a single-product market in a single geographic location does not need a corporate-level strategy regarding product diversity or an international strategy to deal with geographic diversity.TrueFalse

If marginal cost equals average cost, then what must be TRUE?

Which of the following statements is CORRECT?

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