The Relative Instability of Model Comparison with Cross-validation
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Cross-validation (CV) is known to provide asymptotically exact tests and confidence intervals for model improvement but only when the model comparison is relatively stable. Surprisingly, we prove that even simple, individually stable models can generate relatively unstable comparisons, calling into question the validity of CV inference. Specifically, we show that the Lasso and its close cousin, soft-thresholding, generate relatively unstable comparisons and invalid CV inferences, even in the most favorable of learning settings and when both models are individually stable. These findings highlight the importance of verifying relative stability before deploying CV for model comparison.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 13 Oct 2026). Builds on 8 of its 41 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 6 Aug 2025.
Builds on
8 of 41 references.
References · 8
- 2015Train faster, generalize better: Stability of stochastic gradient descentcited by 549
- 2021Cross-validation: what does it estimate and how well does it do it?cited by 65
- 2020Cross-validation Confidence Intervals for Test Errorcited by 33
- 2017Cross-Validation with Confidencecited by 14
- 2020Approximate Cross-validation: Guarantees for Model Assessment and Selectioncited by 14
- 2016Stability revisited: new generalisation bounds for the Leave-one-Outcited by 10
- 2019Stability of decision trees and logistic regressioncited by 4
- 2024The Limits of Assumption-free Tests for Algorithm Performancecited by 3
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.