validation vs test vs training accuracy, which one to compare for claiming overfit?












4












$begingroup$


I have read on the several answers here and on the internet that cross-validation helps to indicate that if the model will generalize well or not and about overfitting.



But I am confused that which two accuracies/errors amoung test/training/validation should I compare to be able to see if the model is overfitting or not?



For example:



I divide my data for 70% training and 30% test.



When I get to run 10 fold cross-validation, I get 10 accuracies that I can take the average/mean of. should I call this mean as validation accuracy?



Afterward, I test the model on 30% test data and get Test Accuracy.



In this case, what will be training accuracy? and which two accuracies I compare to see if the model is overfitting or not?



This is my first question on this platform so please ignore errors.









share







New contributor




A.B is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$

















    4












    $begingroup$


    I have read on the several answers here and on the internet that cross-validation helps to indicate that if the model will generalize well or not and about overfitting.



    But I am confused that which two accuracies/errors amoung test/training/validation should I compare to be able to see if the model is overfitting or not?



    For example:



    I divide my data for 70% training and 30% test.



    When I get to run 10 fold cross-validation, I get 10 accuracies that I can take the average/mean of. should I call this mean as validation accuracy?



    Afterward, I test the model on 30% test data and get Test Accuracy.



    In this case, what will be training accuracy? and which two accuracies I compare to see if the model is overfitting or not?



    This is my first question on this platform so please ignore errors.









    share







    New contributor




    A.B is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.







    $endgroup$















      4












      4








      4





      $begingroup$


      I have read on the several answers here and on the internet that cross-validation helps to indicate that if the model will generalize well or not and about overfitting.



      But I am confused that which two accuracies/errors amoung test/training/validation should I compare to be able to see if the model is overfitting or not?



      For example:



      I divide my data for 70% training and 30% test.



      When I get to run 10 fold cross-validation, I get 10 accuracies that I can take the average/mean of. should I call this mean as validation accuracy?



      Afterward, I test the model on 30% test data and get Test Accuracy.



      In this case, what will be training accuracy? and which two accuracies I compare to see if the model is overfitting or not?



      This is my first question on this platform so please ignore errors.









      share







      New contributor




      A.B is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.







      $endgroup$




      I have read on the several answers here and on the internet that cross-validation helps to indicate that if the model will generalize well or not and about overfitting.



      But I am confused that which two accuracies/errors amoung test/training/validation should I compare to be able to see if the model is overfitting or not?



      For example:



      I divide my data for 70% training and 30% test.



      When I get to run 10 fold cross-validation, I get 10 accuracies that I can take the average/mean of. should I call this mean as validation accuracy?



      Afterward, I test the model on 30% test data and get Test Accuracy.



      In this case, what will be training accuracy? and which two accuracies I compare to see if the model is overfitting or not?



      This is my first question on this platform so please ignore errors.







      machine-learning cross-validation accuracy overfitting





      share







      New contributor




      A.B is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.










      share







      New contributor




      A.B is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.








      share



      share






      New contributor




      A.B is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      asked 10 hours ago









      A.BA.B

      1234




      1234




      New contributor




      A.B is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.





      New contributor





      A.B is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






      A.B is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          4












          $begingroup$


          When I get to run 10 fold cross-validation, I get 10 accuracies that I
          can take the average/mean of. should I call this mean as validation
          accuracy?




          No. It is a [estimate of] test accuracy.

          The difference between validation and test sets (and their corresponding accuracies) is that validation set is used to build/select a better model (e.g. avoid over-fitting), meaning it affects the final model. However, since 10-fold CV always tests an already-built model, and it is not used here to select between models, its 10% held-out is a test set not a validation set.




          Afterward, I test the model on 30% test data and get Test Accuracy.




          If you don't use the K-fold to select between multiple models, this part is not needed, run K-fold on 100% of data to get the test accuracy. Otherwise, you should keep a final test set, since the result of K-fold would be a validation accuracy.




          In this case, what will be training accuracy?




          From each of 10 folds you can get a test accuracy on 10% of data, and a training accuracy on 90% of data. In python, method cross_val_score only returns the test accuracies. Here is how to get both:



          from  sklearn import model_selection
          from sklearn import datasets
          from sklearn import svm

          iris = datasets.load_iris()
          clf = svm.SVC(kernel='linear', C=1)
          scores = model_selection.cross_validate(clf, iris.data, iris.target, cv=5, return_train_score=True)
          print('Train scores:')
          print(scores['train_score'])
          print('Test scores:')
          print(scores['test_score'])



          and which two accuracies I compare to see if the model is overfitting or not?




          You should compare the training and test accuracies to identify over-fitting. A training accuracy subjectively far higher than test accuracy indicates over-fitting.



          I suggest "Bias and Variance" and "Learning curves" parts of "Machine Learning Yearning - Andrew Ng". It presents plots and interpretations for all the cases with a clear narration.



          More on validation set



          Validation set shows up in two general cases: (1) building a model, and (2) selecting between multiple models,




          1. Two examples for building a model: we (a) stop training a neural network, or (b) stop pruning a decision tree when accuracy of model on validation set starts to decrease. Then, we test the final model on a held-out set, to get the test accuracy.


          2. An example for selecting between multiple models: we do K-fold CV on a SVM and a decision tree, then we select the one with higher validation accuracy. Finally, we test the selected model on a held-out set, to get the test accuracy.







          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$









          • 1




            $begingroup$
            I think I disagree with "30% test set not needed." If you are using CV to select a better model, then you are exposing the test folds (which I would call a validation set in this case) and risk overfitting there. The final test set should remain untouched (by both you and your algorithms) until the end, to estimate the final model performance (if that's something you need). But yes, while model-building, the (averaged) training fold score vs. the (averaged) validation fold score is what you're looking at for overfitting indication.
            $endgroup$
            – Ben Reiniger
            9 hours ago












          • $begingroup$
            @BenReiniger You are right I should clear this case.
            $endgroup$
            – Esmailian
            9 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            @Esmailian train_score is also an average of 10 scores? Also, to do a similar kind of thing with GridSearchCV(in case hyper paramter tuning and cross-validation are required in one step) can we use return_train_score=true? is it same?
            $endgroup$
            – A.B
            7 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            @A.B It is an array, needs to be averaged. return_train_score=true or =false only changes the returned report, underlying result is the same.
            $endgroup$
            – Esmailian
            7 hours ago






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Okay thanks, I am accepting the answer as "which accuracy is to be used" makes sense. But is it possible for you to elaborate more on "validation set is used to build/select a better model (e.g. avoid over-fitting) vs in your case, 10-fold CV tests an already-built model" for me and future readers?
            $endgroup$
            – A.B
            7 hours ago



















          3












          $begingroup$

          Cross validation splits your data into K folds. Each fold contains a set of training data and test data. You are correct that you get K different error rates that you then take the mean of. These error rates come from the test set of each of your K folds. If you want to get the training error rate, you would calculate the error rate on the training part of each of these K folds and then take the average.






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Thank you for answer.
            $endgroup$
            – A.B
            7 hours ago











          Your Answer





          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
          });
          });
          }, "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "557"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: false,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: null,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });






          A.B is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fdatascience.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f47263%2fvalidation-vs-test-vs-training-accuracy-which-one-to-compare-for-claiming-overf%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes








          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          4












          $begingroup$


          When I get to run 10 fold cross-validation, I get 10 accuracies that I
          can take the average/mean of. should I call this mean as validation
          accuracy?




          No. It is a [estimate of] test accuracy.

          The difference between validation and test sets (and their corresponding accuracies) is that validation set is used to build/select a better model (e.g. avoid over-fitting), meaning it affects the final model. However, since 10-fold CV always tests an already-built model, and it is not used here to select between models, its 10% held-out is a test set not a validation set.




          Afterward, I test the model on 30% test data and get Test Accuracy.




          If you don't use the K-fold to select between multiple models, this part is not needed, run K-fold on 100% of data to get the test accuracy. Otherwise, you should keep a final test set, since the result of K-fold would be a validation accuracy.




          In this case, what will be training accuracy?




          From each of 10 folds you can get a test accuracy on 10% of data, and a training accuracy on 90% of data. In python, method cross_val_score only returns the test accuracies. Here is how to get both:



          from  sklearn import model_selection
          from sklearn import datasets
          from sklearn import svm

          iris = datasets.load_iris()
          clf = svm.SVC(kernel='linear', C=1)
          scores = model_selection.cross_validate(clf, iris.data, iris.target, cv=5, return_train_score=True)
          print('Train scores:')
          print(scores['train_score'])
          print('Test scores:')
          print(scores['test_score'])



          and which two accuracies I compare to see if the model is overfitting or not?




          You should compare the training and test accuracies to identify over-fitting. A training accuracy subjectively far higher than test accuracy indicates over-fitting.



          I suggest "Bias and Variance" and "Learning curves" parts of "Machine Learning Yearning - Andrew Ng". It presents plots and interpretations for all the cases with a clear narration.



          More on validation set



          Validation set shows up in two general cases: (1) building a model, and (2) selecting between multiple models,




          1. Two examples for building a model: we (a) stop training a neural network, or (b) stop pruning a decision tree when accuracy of model on validation set starts to decrease. Then, we test the final model on a held-out set, to get the test accuracy.


          2. An example for selecting between multiple models: we do K-fold CV on a SVM and a decision tree, then we select the one with higher validation accuracy. Finally, we test the selected model on a held-out set, to get the test accuracy.







          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$









          • 1




            $begingroup$
            I think I disagree with "30% test set not needed." If you are using CV to select a better model, then you are exposing the test folds (which I would call a validation set in this case) and risk overfitting there. The final test set should remain untouched (by both you and your algorithms) until the end, to estimate the final model performance (if that's something you need). But yes, while model-building, the (averaged) training fold score vs. the (averaged) validation fold score is what you're looking at for overfitting indication.
            $endgroup$
            – Ben Reiniger
            9 hours ago












          • $begingroup$
            @BenReiniger You are right I should clear this case.
            $endgroup$
            – Esmailian
            9 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            @Esmailian train_score is also an average of 10 scores? Also, to do a similar kind of thing with GridSearchCV(in case hyper paramter tuning and cross-validation are required in one step) can we use return_train_score=true? is it same?
            $endgroup$
            – A.B
            7 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            @A.B It is an array, needs to be averaged. return_train_score=true or =false only changes the returned report, underlying result is the same.
            $endgroup$
            – Esmailian
            7 hours ago






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Okay thanks, I am accepting the answer as "which accuracy is to be used" makes sense. But is it possible for you to elaborate more on "validation set is used to build/select a better model (e.g. avoid over-fitting) vs in your case, 10-fold CV tests an already-built model" for me and future readers?
            $endgroup$
            – A.B
            7 hours ago
















          4












          $begingroup$


          When I get to run 10 fold cross-validation, I get 10 accuracies that I
          can take the average/mean of. should I call this mean as validation
          accuracy?




          No. It is a [estimate of] test accuracy.

          The difference between validation and test sets (and their corresponding accuracies) is that validation set is used to build/select a better model (e.g. avoid over-fitting), meaning it affects the final model. However, since 10-fold CV always tests an already-built model, and it is not used here to select between models, its 10% held-out is a test set not a validation set.




          Afterward, I test the model on 30% test data and get Test Accuracy.




          If you don't use the K-fold to select between multiple models, this part is not needed, run K-fold on 100% of data to get the test accuracy. Otherwise, you should keep a final test set, since the result of K-fold would be a validation accuracy.




          In this case, what will be training accuracy?




          From each of 10 folds you can get a test accuracy on 10% of data, and a training accuracy on 90% of data. In python, method cross_val_score only returns the test accuracies. Here is how to get both:



          from  sklearn import model_selection
          from sklearn import datasets
          from sklearn import svm

          iris = datasets.load_iris()
          clf = svm.SVC(kernel='linear', C=1)
          scores = model_selection.cross_validate(clf, iris.data, iris.target, cv=5, return_train_score=True)
          print('Train scores:')
          print(scores['train_score'])
          print('Test scores:')
          print(scores['test_score'])



          and which two accuracies I compare to see if the model is overfitting or not?




          You should compare the training and test accuracies to identify over-fitting. A training accuracy subjectively far higher than test accuracy indicates over-fitting.



          I suggest "Bias and Variance" and "Learning curves" parts of "Machine Learning Yearning - Andrew Ng". It presents plots and interpretations for all the cases with a clear narration.



          More on validation set



          Validation set shows up in two general cases: (1) building a model, and (2) selecting between multiple models,




          1. Two examples for building a model: we (a) stop training a neural network, or (b) stop pruning a decision tree when accuracy of model on validation set starts to decrease. Then, we test the final model on a held-out set, to get the test accuracy.


          2. An example for selecting between multiple models: we do K-fold CV on a SVM and a decision tree, then we select the one with higher validation accuracy. Finally, we test the selected model on a held-out set, to get the test accuracy.







          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$









          • 1




            $begingroup$
            I think I disagree with "30% test set not needed." If you are using CV to select a better model, then you are exposing the test folds (which I would call a validation set in this case) and risk overfitting there. The final test set should remain untouched (by both you and your algorithms) until the end, to estimate the final model performance (if that's something you need). But yes, while model-building, the (averaged) training fold score vs. the (averaged) validation fold score is what you're looking at for overfitting indication.
            $endgroup$
            – Ben Reiniger
            9 hours ago












          • $begingroup$
            @BenReiniger You are right I should clear this case.
            $endgroup$
            – Esmailian
            9 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            @Esmailian train_score is also an average of 10 scores? Also, to do a similar kind of thing with GridSearchCV(in case hyper paramter tuning and cross-validation are required in one step) can we use return_train_score=true? is it same?
            $endgroup$
            – A.B
            7 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            @A.B It is an array, needs to be averaged. return_train_score=true or =false only changes the returned report, underlying result is the same.
            $endgroup$
            – Esmailian
            7 hours ago






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Okay thanks, I am accepting the answer as "which accuracy is to be used" makes sense. But is it possible for you to elaborate more on "validation set is used to build/select a better model (e.g. avoid over-fitting) vs in your case, 10-fold CV tests an already-built model" for me and future readers?
            $endgroup$
            – A.B
            7 hours ago














          4












          4








          4





          $begingroup$


          When I get to run 10 fold cross-validation, I get 10 accuracies that I
          can take the average/mean of. should I call this mean as validation
          accuracy?




          No. It is a [estimate of] test accuracy.

          The difference between validation and test sets (and their corresponding accuracies) is that validation set is used to build/select a better model (e.g. avoid over-fitting), meaning it affects the final model. However, since 10-fold CV always tests an already-built model, and it is not used here to select between models, its 10% held-out is a test set not a validation set.




          Afterward, I test the model on 30% test data and get Test Accuracy.




          If you don't use the K-fold to select between multiple models, this part is not needed, run K-fold on 100% of data to get the test accuracy. Otherwise, you should keep a final test set, since the result of K-fold would be a validation accuracy.




          In this case, what will be training accuracy?




          From each of 10 folds you can get a test accuracy on 10% of data, and a training accuracy on 90% of data. In python, method cross_val_score only returns the test accuracies. Here is how to get both:



          from  sklearn import model_selection
          from sklearn import datasets
          from sklearn import svm

          iris = datasets.load_iris()
          clf = svm.SVC(kernel='linear', C=1)
          scores = model_selection.cross_validate(clf, iris.data, iris.target, cv=5, return_train_score=True)
          print('Train scores:')
          print(scores['train_score'])
          print('Test scores:')
          print(scores['test_score'])



          and which two accuracies I compare to see if the model is overfitting or not?




          You should compare the training and test accuracies to identify over-fitting. A training accuracy subjectively far higher than test accuracy indicates over-fitting.



          I suggest "Bias and Variance" and "Learning curves" parts of "Machine Learning Yearning - Andrew Ng". It presents plots and interpretations for all the cases with a clear narration.



          More on validation set



          Validation set shows up in two general cases: (1) building a model, and (2) selecting between multiple models,




          1. Two examples for building a model: we (a) stop training a neural network, or (b) stop pruning a decision tree when accuracy of model on validation set starts to decrease. Then, we test the final model on a held-out set, to get the test accuracy.


          2. An example for selecting between multiple models: we do K-fold CV on a SVM and a decision tree, then we select the one with higher validation accuracy. Finally, we test the selected model on a held-out set, to get the test accuracy.







          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$




          When I get to run 10 fold cross-validation, I get 10 accuracies that I
          can take the average/mean of. should I call this mean as validation
          accuracy?




          No. It is a [estimate of] test accuracy.

          The difference between validation and test sets (and their corresponding accuracies) is that validation set is used to build/select a better model (e.g. avoid over-fitting), meaning it affects the final model. However, since 10-fold CV always tests an already-built model, and it is not used here to select between models, its 10% held-out is a test set not a validation set.




          Afterward, I test the model on 30% test data and get Test Accuracy.




          If you don't use the K-fold to select between multiple models, this part is not needed, run K-fold on 100% of data to get the test accuracy. Otherwise, you should keep a final test set, since the result of K-fold would be a validation accuracy.




          In this case, what will be training accuracy?




          From each of 10 folds you can get a test accuracy on 10% of data, and a training accuracy on 90% of data. In python, method cross_val_score only returns the test accuracies. Here is how to get both:



          from  sklearn import model_selection
          from sklearn import datasets
          from sklearn import svm

          iris = datasets.load_iris()
          clf = svm.SVC(kernel='linear', C=1)
          scores = model_selection.cross_validate(clf, iris.data, iris.target, cv=5, return_train_score=True)
          print('Train scores:')
          print(scores['train_score'])
          print('Test scores:')
          print(scores['test_score'])



          and which two accuracies I compare to see if the model is overfitting or not?




          You should compare the training and test accuracies to identify over-fitting. A training accuracy subjectively far higher than test accuracy indicates over-fitting.



          I suggest "Bias and Variance" and "Learning curves" parts of "Machine Learning Yearning - Andrew Ng". It presents plots and interpretations for all the cases with a clear narration.



          More on validation set



          Validation set shows up in two general cases: (1) building a model, and (2) selecting between multiple models,




          1. Two examples for building a model: we (a) stop training a neural network, or (b) stop pruning a decision tree when accuracy of model on validation set starts to decrease. Then, we test the final model on a held-out set, to get the test accuracy.


          2. An example for selecting between multiple models: we do K-fold CV on a SVM and a decision tree, then we select the one with higher validation accuracy. Finally, we test the selected model on a held-out set, to get the test accuracy.








          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited 6 hours ago

























          answered 9 hours ago









          EsmailianEsmailian

          947110




          947110








          • 1




            $begingroup$
            I think I disagree with "30% test set not needed." If you are using CV to select a better model, then you are exposing the test folds (which I would call a validation set in this case) and risk overfitting there. The final test set should remain untouched (by both you and your algorithms) until the end, to estimate the final model performance (if that's something you need). But yes, while model-building, the (averaged) training fold score vs. the (averaged) validation fold score is what you're looking at for overfitting indication.
            $endgroup$
            – Ben Reiniger
            9 hours ago












          • $begingroup$
            @BenReiniger You are right I should clear this case.
            $endgroup$
            – Esmailian
            9 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            @Esmailian train_score is also an average of 10 scores? Also, to do a similar kind of thing with GridSearchCV(in case hyper paramter tuning and cross-validation are required in one step) can we use return_train_score=true? is it same?
            $endgroup$
            – A.B
            7 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            @A.B It is an array, needs to be averaged. return_train_score=true or =false only changes the returned report, underlying result is the same.
            $endgroup$
            – Esmailian
            7 hours ago






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Okay thanks, I am accepting the answer as "which accuracy is to be used" makes sense. But is it possible for you to elaborate more on "validation set is used to build/select a better model (e.g. avoid over-fitting) vs in your case, 10-fold CV tests an already-built model" for me and future readers?
            $endgroup$
            – A.B
            7 hours ago














          • 1




            $begingroup$
            I think I disagree with "30% test set not needed." If you are using CV to select a better model, then you are exposing the test folds (which I would call a validation set in this case) and risk overfitting there. The final test set should remain untouched (by both you and your algorithms) until the end, to estimate the final model performance (if that's something you need). But yes, while model-building, the (averaged) training fold score vs. the (averaged) validation fold score is what you're looking at for overfitting indication.
            $endgroup$
            – Ben Reiniger
            9 hours ago












          • $begingroup$
            @BenReiniger You are right I should clear this case.
            $endgroup$
            – Esmailian
            9 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            @Esmailian train_score is also an average of 10 scores? Also, to do a similar kind of thing with GridSearchCV(in case hyper paramter tuning and cross-validation are required in one step) can we use return_train_score=true? is it same?
            $endgroup$
            – A.B
            7 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            @A.B It is an array, needs to be averaged. return_train_score=true or =false only changes the returned report, underlying result is the same.
            $endgroup$
            – Esmailian
            7 hours ago






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Okay thanks, I am accepting the answer as "which accuracy is to be used" makes sense. But is it possible for you to elaborate more on "validation set is used to build/select a better model (e.g. avoid over-fitting) vs in your case, 10-fold CV tests an already-built model" for me and future readers?
            $endgroup$
            – A.B
            7 hours ago








          1




          1




          $begingroup$
          I think I disagree with "30% test set not needed." If you are using CV to select a better model, then you are exposing the test folds (which I would call a validation set in this case) and risk overfitting there. The final test set should remain untouched (by both you and your algorithms) until the end, to estimate the final model performance (if that's something you need). But yes, while model-building, the (averaged) training fold score vs. the (averaged) validation fold score is what you're looking at for overfitting indication.
          $endgroup$
          – Ben Reiniger
          9 hours ago






          $begingroup$
          I think I disagree with "30% test set not needed." If you are using CV to select a better model, then you are exposing the test folds (which I would call a validation set in this case) and risk overfitting there. The final test set should remain untouched (by both you and your algorithms) until the end, to estimate the final model performance (if that's something you need). But yes, while model-building, the (averaged) training fold score vs. the (averaged) validation fold score is what you're looking at for overfitting indication.
          $endgroup$
          – Ben Reiniger
          9 hours ago














          $begingroup$
          @BenReiniger You are right I should clear this case.
          $endgroup$
          – Esmailian
          9 hours ago




          $begingroup$
          @BenReiniger You are right I should clear this case.
          $endgroup$
          – Esmailian
          9 hours ago












          $begingroup$
          @Esmailian train_score is also an average of 10 scores? Also, to do a similar kind of thing with GridSearchCV(in case hyper paramter tuning and cross-validation are required in one step) can we use return_train_score=true? is it same?
          $endgroup$
          – A.B
          7 hours ago




          $begingroup$
          @Esmailian train_score is also an average of 10 scores? Also, to do a similar kind of thing with GridSearchCV(in case hyper paramter tuning and cross-validation are required in one step) can we use return_train_score=true? is it same?
          $endgroup$
          – A.B
          7 hours ago












          $begingroup$
          @A.B It is an array, needs to be averaged. return_train_score=true or =false only changes the returned report, underlying result is the same.
          $endgroup$
          – Esmailian
          7 hours ago




          $begingroup$
          @A.B It is an array, needs to be averaged. return_train_score=true or =false only changes the returned report, underlying result is the same.
          $endgroup$
          – Esmailian
          7 hours ago




          1




          1




          $begingroup$
          Okay thanks, I am accepting the answer as "which accuracy is to be used" makes sense. But is it possible for you to elaborate more on "validation set is used to build/select a better model (e.g. avoid over-fitting) vs in your case, 10-fold CV tests an already-built model" for me and future readers?
          $endgroup$
          – A.B
          7 hours ago




          $begingroup$
          Okay thanks, I am accepting the answer as "which accuracy is to be used" makes sense. But is it possible for you to elaborate more on "validation set is used to build/select a better model (e.g. avoid over-fitting) vs in your case, 10-fold CV tests an already-built model" for me and future readers?
          $endgroup$
          – A.B
          7 hours ago











          3












          $begingroup$

          Cross validation splits your data into K folds. Each fold contains a set of training data and test data. You are correct that you get K different error rates that you then take the mean of. These error rates come from the test set of each of your K folds. If you want to get the training error rate, you would calculate the error rate on the training part of each of these K folds and then take the average.






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Thank you for answer.
            $endgroup$
            – A.B
            7 hours ago
















          3












          $begingroup$

          Cross validation splits your data into K folds. Each fold contains a set of training data and test data. You are correct that you get K different error rates that you then take the mean of. These error rates come from the test set of each of your K folds. If you want to get the training error rate, you would calculate the error rate on the training part of each of these K folds and then take the average.






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Thank you for answer.
            $endgroup$
            – A.B
            7 hours ago














          3












          3








          3





          $begingroup$

          Cross validation splits your data into K folds. Each fold contains a set of training data and test data. You are correct that you get K different error rates that you then take the mean of. These error rates come from the test set of each of your K folds. If you want to get the training error rate, you would calculate the error rate on the training part of each of these K folds and then take the average.






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          Cross validation splits your data into K folds. Each fold contains a set of training data and test data. You are correct that you get K different error rates that you then take the mean of. These error rates come from the test set of each of your K folds. If you want to get the training error rate, you would calculate the error rate on the training part of each of these K folds and then take the average.







          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered 10 hours ago









          astelastel

          311




          311












          • $begingroup$
            Thank you for answer.
            $endgroup$
            – A.B
            7 hours ago


















          • $begingroup$
            Thank you for answer.
            $endgroup$
            – A.B
            7 hours ago
















          $begingroup$
          Thank you for answer.
          $endgroup$
          – A.B
          7 hours ago




          $begingroup$
          Thank you for answer.
          $endgroup$
          – A.B
          7 hours ago










          A.B is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          A.B is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













          A.B is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












          A.B is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
















          Thanks for contributing an answer to Data Science Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fdatascience.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f47263%2fvalidation-vs-test-vs-training-accuracy-which-one-to-compare-for-claiming-overf%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          GameSpot

          connect to host localhost port 22: Connection refused

          Getting a Wifi WPA2 wifi connection