analiza aiqbench
This paper introduces a unified theoretical framework that redefines how cross-validation accuracy serves as evidence for model generalization, particularly in heterogeneous data settings. By deriving conservative upper bounds on true risk through cumulant envelopes, the authors demonstrate that increasing fold counts does not automatically enhance statistical validity when data dependencies are strong. The work provides rigorous mathematical tools to distinguish between observed performance and genuine uncertainty, offering a principled approach for validating models in small-sample or multimodal applications.
When Is Accuracy Evidence? A Unified Theory of Generalisation, Validation, and Information Fusion
arXiv:2610.03465v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: K-fold cross-validation (CV) is widely used as evidence of out-of-sample performance, although folds are neither independent experiments nor equally informative under heterogeneous data. Cross Upper-Bound Validation (CUBV) replaces point-wise CV accuracy by conservative upper bounds on true risk. Here we generalise CUBV through a single exponential framework in which the moment-generating function of the generalisation gap is controlled by a cumulant envelope gamma(lambda). This yields a family of risk bounds covering Hoeffding-, Bernstein-, dependency-aware, PAC-Bayesian, and heterogeneous source-fusion settings. For K-fold CV, dependence between fold-wise gaps is modelled through a joint sub-Gaussian proxy matrix. Under equicorrelation, this gives an effective number of folds, Keff = K/[1+(K-1)rho], showing that increasing K does not necessarily increase statistical evidence when folds are strongly dependent. The framework is also extended to posterior distributions over predictors and weighted multi-source fusion, where weights are selected by minimising an upper bound on future risk rather than empirical error alone. Experiments with trained linear classifiers on heterogeneous multimodal Gaussian mixtures compare K-fold CV with full-sample resubstitution plus risk correction. Bounds are evaluated by coverage and tightness. In low-dimensional small-sample settings, K-fold partitioning can increase uncertainty because individual folds under-represent minority modes, while corrected resubstitution can remain valid and tighter; this effect disappears as sample size increases. Overall, gamma-CUBV separates observed performance, uncertainty, dependence, model complexity, and confidence into explicit terms, providing a unified route from CV scores to risk statements and a principled validation criterion for heterogeneous small-sample applications such as neuroimaging.
Title:When Is Accuracy Evidence? A Unified Theory of Generalisation, Validation, and Information Fusion
Abstract:K-fold cross-validation (CV) is widely used as evidence of out-of-sample performance, although folds are neither independent experiments nor equally informative under heterogeneous data. Cross Upper-Bound Validation (CUBV) replaces point-wise CV accuracy by conservative upper bounds on true risk. Here we generalise CUBV through a single exponential framework in which the moment-generating function of the generalisation gap is controlled by a cumulant envelope gamma(lambda). This yields a family of risk bounds covering Hoeffding-, Bernstein-, dependency-aware, PAC-Bayesian, and heterogeneous source-fusion settings. For K-fold CV, dependence between fold-wise gaps is modelled through a joint sub-Gaussian proxy matrix. Under equicorrelation, this gives an effective number of folds, Keff = K/[1+(K-1)rho], showing that increasing K does not necessarily increase statistical evidence when folds are strongly dependent. The framework is also extended to posterior distributions over predictors and weighted multi-source fusion, where weights are selected by minimising an upper bound on future risk rather than empirical error alone. Experiments with trained linear classifiers on heterogeneous multimodal Gaussian mixtures compare K-fold CV with full-sample resubstitution plus risk correction. Bounds are evaluated by coverage and tightness. In low-dimensional small-sample settings, K-fold partitioning can increase uncertainty because individual folds under-represent minority modes, while corrected resubstitution can remain valid and tighter; this effect disappears as sample size increases. Overall, gamma-CUBV separates observed performance, uncertainty, dependence, model complexity, and confidence into explicit terms, providing a unified route from CV scores to risk statements and a principled validation criterion for heterogeneous small-sample applications such as neuroimaging.
Machine Learning (stat.ML); Machine Learning (cs.LG); Data Analysis, Statistics and Probability (physics.data-an)
arXiv:2610.03465 [stat.ML]
(or arXiv:2610.03465v1 [stat.ML] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.03465 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 360 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe
Value generalisation Theory of Change: the theory behind the approach
AI Alignment Forum · 28 aug. 2026
News
Quantum Computing Report · 25 iul. 2026
Research Note: Filtering Subversion-Relevant Information From Pretraining Data Is Feasible
LessWrong · 5 oct. 2026
Anthropic reasoning without duplicates is just standard Bayesian updating
LessWrong · 30 iul. 2026