Cross-validation with antithetic Gaussian randomization
基于对偶高斯随机化的交叉验证AI 解读 ↓
本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。
DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。
引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。
关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要研究通用预测误差评估,没有宏观预测或金融收益预测的直接文本依据。
基于对偶高斯随机化的交叉验证AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
Abstract We introduce a new cross-validation (CV) method based on an equicorrelated Gaussian randomization scheme. Our method is well-suited for problems where sample splitting is infeasible, either because the data violate the assumption of independent and identically distributed samples, or because there are insufficient samples to form representative train–test data pairs. In such problems, our method provides a simple, principled, and computationally efficient approach to estimating prediction error, often outperforming standard CV while requiring only a small number of repetitions. Drawing inspiration from recent splitting techniques like data fission and data thinning, our method constructs train–test data pairs using Gaussian randomization. Our main contribution is the introduction of an antithetic Gaussian randomization scheme, involving a carefully designed correlation structure among the randomization variables. We show theoretically that this antithetic construction can eliminate the bias of CV for a broad class of smooth prediction functions, without inflating variance. Through simulations across a range of data types and loss functions, we demonstrate that our estimator outperforms existing methods for prediction error estimation.