Search Results
| Search type | Search syntax |
|---|---|
| Tags | [tag] |
| Exact | "words here" |
| Author |
user:1234 user:me (yours) |
| Score |
score:3 (3+) score:0 (none) |
| Answers |
answers:3 (3+) answers:0 (none) isaccepted:yes hasaccepted:no inquestion:1234 |
| Views | views:250 |
| Code | code:"if (foo != bar)" |
| Sections |
title:apples body:"apples oranges" |
| URL | url:"*.example.com" |
| Saves | in:saves |
| Status |
closed:yes duplicate:no migrated:no wiki:no |
| Types |
is:question is:answer |
| Exclude |
-[tag] -apples |
| For more details on advanced search visit our help page | |
Results tagged with cross-validation
Search options not deleted
user 221025
Repeatedly withholding subsets of the data during model fitting in order to quantify the model performance on the withheld data subsets.
1
vote
Accepted
Build confusion matrix for cross validated results?
You could compute all the confusion matrices, and then compute the mean and standard deviation for each entry. You could then report a summarized confusion matrix of means $\pm$ standard deviations.
…
- 209