Skip to content

comparing classification methods: 10-fold cv or leaving-one-out ?

3 messages · Christoph Lehmann, Brian Ripley, Tony Plate

#
Hi
what would you recommend to compare classification methods such as LDA,
classification trees (rpart), bagging, SVM, etc:

10-fold cv (as in Ripley p. 346f)

or

leaving-one-out (as e.g. implemented in LDA)?

my data-set is not that huge (roughly 200 entries)

many thanks for a hint

Christoph
#
Leave-one-out is very inaccurate for some methods, notably trees, but fine 
for some others (e.g. LDA) if used with a good measure of accuracy.

Hint: there is a very large literature on this, so read any good book on 
classification to find out what is known.
On Tue, 6 Jan 2004, Christoph Lehmann wrote:

            
Not a valid reference:  did you mean Venables & Ripley (2000, p.346f)?
Try reading Ripley (1996), for example.
That's rather small to compare error rates on.
#
I would recommend reading the following:  Dietterich, T. G., (1998). 
Approximate Statistical Tests for Comparing Supervised Classification 
Learning Algorithms. Neural Computation, 10 (7) 1895-1924. 
http://web.engr.oregonstate.edu/~tgd/publications/index.html

The issues in comparing methods are subtle and difficult.  With such a 
small data set I would be a little surprised if you could get any result 
that are truly statistically significant, especially if your goal is to 
compare among good non-linear methods (i.e., in which there are unlikely to 
huge differences because of model misspecification).  However, because the 
issues are subtle, it is easy to get results that appear significant...

hope this helps,

Tony Plate
At Tuesday 04:31 PM 1/6/2004 +0100, Christoph Lehmann wrote:
Tony Plate   tplate at acm.org