Eval ci slides (09) (Đánh giá mô hình, tập trung vào khoảng tin cậy) - Sebastian Raschka
Slide bài giảng về đánh giá mô hình, tập trung vào khoảng tin cậy, thuộc khóa học STAT 479: Machine Learning.
Génération de l'aperçu...
Lecture 09 Model Evaluation 2: Confidence Intervals STAT 479: Machine Learning, Fall 2018 Sebastian Raschka http://stat.wisc.edu/~sraschka/teaching/stat479-fs2018/ Sebastian Raschka STAT 479: Machine Learning FS 2018 1 Overview Bias and Variance Basics Overfitting and Underfitting This Lecture Holdout method Confidence Intervals Model Eval Lectures Repeated holdout Resampling methods Empirical confidence intervals Hyperparameter tuning Cross-Validation Model selection Algorithm Selection Statistical Tests Evaluation Metrics Sebastian Raschka STAT 479: Machine Learning FS 2018 2 Concepts first (More) Code at the end of the lecture Sebastian Raschka STAT 479: Machine Learning FS 2018 3 Main points why we evaluate the predictive performance of a model: 1. Want to estimate the generalization performance, the predictive performance of our model on future (unseen) data. 2. Want to increase the predictive performance by tweaking the learning algorithm and selecting the best performing model from a given hypothesis space. 3. Want to identify the ML algorithm that is best-suited for the problem at hand; thus, we want to compare different algorithms, selecting the best-performing one as well as the best performing model from the algorithm’s hypothesis space. Sebastian Raschka STAT 479: Machine Learning FS 2018 4 Training set error is an optimistically biased estimator of the generalization error Test set error is an unbiased estimator of the generalization error (test sample and hypothesis chosen independently) (in practice, it is actually pessimistically biased; why?) Sebastian Raschka STAT 479: Machine Learning FS 2018 5 Training Evaluation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Holdout Method 2-Fold Cross-Validation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Sebastian Raschka STAT 479: Machine Learning FS 2018 6 Often using the holdout method is not a good idea ... Sebastian Raschka STAT 479: Machine Learning FS 2018 7 Often
… Tải file gốc để đọc toàn bộ tài liệu.
- Nom du document
- Eval ci slides (09) (Đánh giá mô hình, tập trung vào khoảng tin cậy) - Sebastian Raschka
- École / Cours
- University Wisconsin-Madison · Machine learning
- Auteur (dans le document)
- Sebastian Raschka
- Contenu
- Bài giảng này giới thiệu về đánh giá mô hình học máy, tập trung vào khoảng tin cậy và các phương pháp như Holdout. Nó chỉ ra những hạn chế của phương pháp Holdout, đặc biệt là ảnh hưởng của việc lấy mẫu con lên tính đại diện của dữ liệu.
- Table des matières
- Lecture 09
- Model Evaluation 2: Confidence Intervals
- STAT 479: Machine Learning, Fall 2018
- Sebastian Raschka
- Overview
- Bias and Variance
- Basics
- Overfitting and Underfitting
- This Lecture
- Holdout method
- Confidence Intervals
- Model Eval Lectures
- Repeated holdout
- Resampling methods
- Empirical confidence intervals
- Hyperparameter tuning
- Cross-Validation
- Model selection
- Algorithm Selection
- Statistical Tests
- Evaluation Metrics
- Main points why we evaluate the predictive performance of a model:
- Training set error is an optimistically biased estimator of the generalization error
- Test set error is an unbiased estimator of the generalization error (test sample and hypothesis chosen independently)
- (in practice, it is actually pessimistically biased; why?)
- Holdout Method
- 2-Fold Cross-Validation
- Often using the holdout method is not a good idea ...
- Test set error as generalization error estimator is pessimistically biased (not so bad)
- But it does not account for variance in the training data (bad)
- Why is pessimistic bias not "so bad"?
- Suppose we have the following ranking based on accuracy:
- Often using the holdout method is not a good idea ...
- Test set error as generalization error estimator is pessimistically biased (not so bad)
- Does not account for variance in the training data (bad)
- We have to keep in mind that a dataset represents a random sample drawn from a probability distribution, and we typically assume that this sample is representative of the true population – more or less. Now, further subsampling without replacement alters the statistic (mean, proportion, and variance) of the sample. The degree to which subsampling without replacement affects the statistic of a sample is inversely proportional to the size of the sample. Let us have a look at an example using the Iris dataset 1 , which we randomly divide into 2/3 training data and 1/3 test data as illustrated in Figure 1. (The source code for generating this graphic is available on GitHub2 .)
- Issues with Subsampling (Independence violation)
- All samples (n = 150)
- Training samples (n = 100)
- Test samples (n = 50)
- Figure 1: Distribution of Iris flower classes upon random subsampling into training and test sets.
- The Iris dataset consists of 50 Setosa, 50 Versicolor, and 50 Virginica flowers; the flower species are distributed uniformly:
- 33.3% Setosa
- 33.3% Versicolor
- Pages
- 51 pages
- Téléversé par
- Giang Le
Foire aux questions
Tài liệu này có miễn phí không?
Có. “Eval ci slides (09) (Đánh giá mô hình, tập trung vào khoảng tin cậy) - Sebastian Raschka” miễn phí — bạn chỉ cần đăng nhập rồi bấm Tải xuống để lấy file gốc.
Tài liệu dài bao nhiêu trang?
Tài liệu gồm 51 trang, thuộc môn Machine learning. Bạn có thể xem trước online trước khi tải.
Tôi có thể xem trước trước khi tải không?
Có. Bạn xem trước tài liệu ngay trên trang này bằng trình đọc online, rồi quyết định tải về.

Commentaires (0)
Aucun commentaire pour le moment. Soyez le premier !