Paper detail

Choice of V for V-Fold Cross-Validation in Least-Squares Density Estimation

This paper studies V-fold cross-validation for model selection in least-squares density estimation. The goal is to provide theoretical grounds for choosing V in order to minimize the least-squares loss of the selected estimator. We first prove a non-asymptotic oracle inequality for V-fold cross-validation and its bias-corrected version (V-fold penalization). In particular, this result implies that V-fold penalization is asymptotically optimal in the nonparametric case. Then, we compute the variance of V-fold cross-validation and related criteria, as well as the variance of key quantities for model selection performance. We show that these variances depend on V like 1+4/(V-1), at least in some particular cases, suggesting that the performance increases much from V=2 to V=5 or 10, and then is almost constant. Overall, this can explain the common advice to take V=5---at least in our setting and when the computational power is limited---, as supported by some simulation experiments. An oracle inequality and exact formulas for the variance are also proved for Monte-Carlo cross-validation, also known as repeated cross-validation, where the parameter V is replaced by the number B of random splits of the data.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors3 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.