Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Prediction Intervals01:03

Prediction Intervals

2.6K
The interval estimate of any variable is known as the prediction interval. It helps decide if a point estimate is dependable.
However, the point estimate is most likely not the exact value of the population parameter, but close to it. After calculating point estimates, we construct interval estimates, called confidence intervals or prediction intervals. This prediction interval comprises a range of values unlike the point estimate and is a better predictor of the observed sample value, y. 
2.6K
Testing a Claim about Standard Deviation01:19

Testing a Claim about Standard Deviation

2.6K
A complete procedure to test a claim about population standard deviation or population variance is explained here.
The hypothesis testing for the claim of population standard deviation (or variance) requires the data and samples to be random and unbiased. The population distribution also must be normal. There is no specific requirement on the sample size as the estimation is based on the chi-square distribution.
As a first step, the hypothesis (null and alternative) concerning the claim about...
2.6K
Estimating Population Mean with Known Standard Deviation01:16

Estimating Population Mean with Known Standard Deviation

9.2K
To construct a confidence interval for a single unknown population mean μ, where the population standard deviation is known, we need sample mean as an estimate for μ and we need the margin of error. Here, the margin of error (EBM) is called the error bound for a population mean (abbreviated EBM). The sample mean is the point estimate of the unknown population mean μ.
The confidence interval estimate will have the form as follows:
(point estimate - error bound, point estimate +...
9.2K
Estimating Population Standard Deviation01:26

Estimating Population Standard Deviation

3.2K
When the population standard deviation is unknown and the sample size is large, the sample standard deviation s is commonly used as a point estimate of σ. However, it can sometimes under or overestimate the population standard deviation. To overcome this drawback, confidence intervals are determined to estimate population parameters and eliminate any calculation bias accurately. However, this only applies to random samples from normally distributed populations. Knowing the sample mean and...
3.2K
Estimating Population Mean with Unknown Standard Deviation01:22

Estimating Population Mean with Unknown Standard Deviation

8.4K
In practice, we rarely know the population standard deviation. In the past, when the sample size was large, this did not present a problem to statisticians. They used the sample standard deviation s as an estimate for σ and proceeded as before to calculate a confidence interval with close enough results. However, statisticians ran into problems when the sample size was small. A small sample size caused inaccuracies in the confidence interval.
William S. Gosset (1876–1937) of the...
8.4K
Regression Toward the Mean01:52

Regression Toward the Mean

6.6K
Regression toward the mean (“RTM”) is a phenomenon in which extremely high or low values—for example, and individual’s blood pressure at a particular moment—appear closer to a group’s average upon remeasuring. Although this statistical peculiarity is the result of random error and chance, it has been problematic across various medical, scientific, financial and psychological applications. In particular, RTM, if not taken into account, can interfere when...
6.6K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Nonparametric motion control in functional connectivity studies in children with autism spectrum disorder.

Biometrics·2026
Same author

An approach to nonparametric inference on the causal dose-response function.

Journal of causal inference·2026
Same author

Performance of fecal inflammatory biomarkers to identify watery shigellosis: Findings from the Enterics for Global Health (EFGH) Shigella surveillance study.

PLoS neglected tropical diseases·2026
Same author

Assessing Racial Disparities in Healthcare Expenditures via Mediator Distribution Shifts.

Statistics in medicine·2026
Same author

Analytic Considerations for the Evaluation of Tuberculosis Preventative Therapy Effectiveness Among People Living with HIV.

Observational studies·2026
Same author

Microcosting the optimization of PrEP implementation among sexual and gender minority individuals with a substance use disorder.

Addiction science & clinical practice·2026

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Nov 13, 2025

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model
05:37

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model

Published on: September 16, 2022

2.3K

Improved small-sample estimation of nonlinear cross-validated prediction metrics.

David Benkeser1, Maya Petersen2, Mark J van der Laan2,3

  • 1Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Emory University.

Journal of the American Statistical Association
|March 15, 2021
PubMed
Summary

Evaluating prediction algorithm performance on training data is crucial. Standard methods like bootstrapping and cross-validation can fail; this study proposes improved estimation techniques for better prediction accuracy.

Keywords:
AUCcross-validationestimating equationsmachine learningpredictiontargeted minimum loss-based estimation

More Related Videos

Development of an Individual-Tree Basal Area Increment Model using a Linear Mixed-Effects Approach
04:35

Development of an Individual-Tree Basal Area Increment Model using a Linear Mixed-Effects Approach

Published on: July 3, 2020

3.5K
Surrogate Model Development for Digital Experiments in Welding
09:17

Surrogate Model Development for Digital Experiments in Welding

Published on: March 28, 2025

1.4K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Nov 13, 2025

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model
05:37

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model

Published on: September 16, 2022

2.3K
Development of an Individual-Tree Basal Area Increment Model using a Linear Mixed-Effects Approach
04:35

Development of an Individual-Tree Basal Area Increment Model using a Linear Mixed-Effects Approach

Published on: July 3, 2020

3.5K
Surrogate Model Development for Digital Experiments in Welding
09:17

Surrogate Model Development for Digital Experiments in Welding

Published on: March 28, 2025

1.4K

Area of Science:

  • Statistics
  • Machine Learning
  • Predictive Modeling

Background:

  • Evaluating prediction algorithm performance using training data presents challenges.
  • Common methods such as bootstrapping and cross-validation have known limitations and can yield suboptimal results.
  • There is a need for robust and accurate performance estimation techniques in machine learning.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate the shortcomings of existing methods for evaluating prediction algorithms on training data.
  • To propose a novel framework for performance estimation based on efficiency theory.
  • To provide theoretical guarantees and demonstrate practical improvements over standard approaches.

Main Methods:

  • A general theoretical study of cross-validation-based estimators.
  • Development of a new estimation framework drawing from efficiency theory.
  • Mathematical proof of weak convergence for the proposed estimators.
  • Empirical evaluation on two specific prediction tasks.

Main Results:

  • Bootstrap-based performance estimation methods were shown to frequently fail.
  • Standard cross-validation estimators were found to perform poorly in certain scenarios.
  • The proposed efficiency theory-based estimators demonstrated significant finite-sample improvements.
  • Theoretical guarantees of weak convergence were established for the new estimators.

Conclusions:

  • Existing methods for evaluating prediction algorithms on training data are often unreliable.
  • The proposed alternative framework offers a more robust and accurate approach to performance estimation.
  • The new estimators provide substantial finite-sample improvements, enhancing the reliability of predictive models.