The DOI matches its Crossref record; 39 of the 39 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Multiple predicting K -fold cross-validation for model selection
Abstract
K-fold cross-validation (CV) is widely adopted as a model selection criterion. In K-fold CV, (K−1) folds are used for model construction and the hold-out fold is allocated to model validation. This implies model construction is more emphasised than the model validation procedure. However, some studies have revealed that more emphasis on the validation procedure may result in improved model selection. Specifically, leave-m-out CV with n samples may achieve variable-selection consistency when m/n approaches to 1. In this study, a new CV method is proposed within the framework of K-fold CV. The proposed method uses (K−1) folds of the data for model validation, while the other fold is for model construction. This provides (K−1) predicted values for each observation. These values are averaged to produce a final predicted value. Then, the model selection based on the averaged predicted values can reduce variation in the assessment due to the averaging. The variable-selection consistency of the suggested method is established. Its advantage over K-fold CV with finite samples are examined under linear, non-linear, and high-dimensional models.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Regression shrinkage and selection via the lasso
Tibshirani, R. (1996) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology · doi:10.1111/j.2517-6161.1996.tb02080.x · Cited by 51,482
Estimating the Dimension of a Model
Schwarz, G. (1978) · The Annals of Statistics · doi:10.1214/aos/1176344136 · Cited by 47,033
Regularization and Variable Selection Via the Elastic Net
Zou, H., & Hastie, T. (2005) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9868.2005.00503.x · Cited by 20,957
Regularization Paths for Generalized Linear Models via Coordinate Descent
Friedman, J., Hastie, T., & Tibshirani, R. (2010) · Journal of Statistical Software · doi:10.18637/jss.v033.i01 · Cited by 19,927
Information Theory and an Extension of the Maximum Likelihood Principle
Akaike, H. (1998) · Springer Series in Statistics · doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-1694-0_15 · Cited by 17,781
Golub, T. R., Slonim, D. K., Tamayo, P., Huard, C., Gaasenbeek, M., Mesirov, J. P., Coller, H., Loh, M. L., Downing, J. R., Caligiuri, M. A., et al. (1999) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.286.5439.531 · Cited by 11,516
Cross validatory choice and assessment of statistical predictions
Stone, M. (1974) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology · doi:10.1111/j.2517-6161.1974.tb00994.x · Cited by 10,881
Ridge regression: Biased estimation for nonorthogonal problems
Hoerl, A. E., & Kennard, R. W. (1970) · Technometrics · doi:10.1080/00401706.1970.10488634 · Cited by 9,648
Variable Selection via Nonconcave Penalized Likelihood and its Oracle Properties
Fan, J., & Li, R. (2001) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1198/016214501753382273 · Cited by 8,900
The adaptive lasso and its oracle properties
Zou, H. (2006) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1198/016214506000000735 · Cited by 7,470
Cited by
Waheed, M., Xiong, H., Tong, K., & Lau, A. Y. (2024) · International Journal of Medical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2024.105632 · Cited by 3
Metadata
- Authors
- Jung, Y.
- Venue
- Journal of Nonparametric Statistics
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2017-11-21
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 197-215
- ISSN
- 1026-7654 (ISSN-L)
- 1048-5252
- 1029-0311
- OpenAlex
- W2768552973
- Cited by
- 499
- References
- 39
- FWCI
- 7.35
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Multiple predicting K -fold cross-validation for model selection. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/10485252.2017.1404598
- The paper
- Jung, Y. (2018). Multiple predicting K -fold cross-validation for model selection. Journal of Nonparametric Statistics. https://doi.org/10.1080/10485252.2017.1404598
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.