Prediction intervals in supervised learning for model evaluation and discrimination
Applied Intelligence, ISSN: 1573-7497, Vol: 42, Issue: 4, Page: 790-804
2015
- 10Citations
- 15Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
In this paper we explore prediction intervals and how they can be used for model evaluation and discrimination in the supervised regression setting of medium sized datasets. We review three different methods for making prediction intervals and the statistics used for their evaluation. How the prediction intervals look like, how different methods behave and how the prediction intervals can be utilized for the graphical evaluation of models is illustrated with the help of simple datasets. Afterwards we propose a combined method for making prediction intervals and explore its performance with two voting schemes for combining predictions of a diverse ensemble of models. All methods are tested on a large set of datasets on which we evaluate individual methods and aggregated variants for their abilities of selecting the best predictions. The analysis of correlations between the root mean squared error and our evaluation statistic show that both stability and reliability of the results increase as the techniques get more elaborate. We confirm that the methodology is suitable for the graphical comparison of individual models and is a viable way of discriminating among model candidates.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84939978371&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10489-014-0632-z; http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10489-014-0632-z; http://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10489-014-0632-z; http://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10489-014-0632-z.pdf; http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10489-014-0632-z/fulltext.html; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10489-014-0632-z; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10489-014-0632-z
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know