Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 757

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Assessing Model Fit by Cross-Validation

Hawkins, Douglas M., Basak, Subhash C., Mills, Denise·2003·Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Sciences

Abstract

When QSAR models are fitted, it is important to validate any fitted model-to check that it is plausible that its predictions will carry over to fresh data not used in the model fitting exercise. There are two standard ways of doing this-using a separate hold-out test sample and the computationally much more burdensome leave-one-out cross-validation in which the entire pool of available compounds is used both to fit the model and to assess its validity. We show by theoretical argument and empiric study of a large QSAR data set that when the available sample size is small-in the dozens or scores rather than the hundreds, holding a portion of it back for testing is wasteful, and that it is much better to use cross-validation, but ensure that this is done properly.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/ci025626i

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 757

Metadata

Authors
Hawkins, D. M., Basak, S. C., & Mills, D.
Venue
Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Sciences
Published
2003-01-24
Volume
43
Issue
2
Pages
579-586
ISSN
  • 0095-2338 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-5142
OpenAlex
W2015928143
Cited by
757
References
4
FWCI
22.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.