Abstract
Despite ongoing theoretical research on cross-validation (CV), many theoretical questions remain widely open. This motivates our investigation into how properties of algorithm-distribution pairs can affect the choice for the number of folds in -fold CV. Our results consist of a novel decomposition of the mean-squared error of cross-validation for risk estimation, which explicitly captures the correlations of error estimates across overlapping folds and includes a novel algorithmic stability notion, squared loss stability, that is considerably weaker than the typically required hypothesis stability in other comparable works. Furthermore, we prove: 1. For any learning algorithm that minimizes empirical risk, the mean-squared error of the -fold cross-validation estimator of the population risk satisfies the following minimax lower bound: where is the sample size, the number of folds, and denotes the number of folds attaining the minimax optimum. This shows that even under idealized conditions, for large values of , CV cannot attain the optimum of order achievable by a validation set of size , reflecting an inherent penalty caused by dependence between folds. 2. Complementing this, we exhibit learning rules for which matching (up to constants) the accuracy of a hold-out estimator of a single fold of size . Together these results delineate the fundamental trade-off in resampling-based risk estimation: CV cannot fully exploit all samples for unbiased risk evaluation, and its minimax performance is pinned between the and regimes.
Connections
Explore this paper’s authors, topics and related work.
Building this map preview
BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.
Reviews 0
Write a review
No reviews yet.
Discussion 0
Add a comment
No comments yet.