Consisting of accidental and systematic errors.

Variance

Error diffusion

Monochrome error diffusion

Having done that, finally, what

Concretely, for the high bias case, that is, the case of under fitting, what we find is that both the cross validation error and the training error are going to be high.

Give or take a few years

Cutie current under tension is...

Secretariat by eight!

Concretely, let our training error and cross validation error be defined as in the previous videos, just say, the squared error, the average squared error as measured on the 20 sets or as measured on the cross validation set.

If your hypothesis basically classified the example y correctly.

If the prediction of our function f equals our target label, and the error is zero, then no update occurs.

Electrified perimeter.

Current under tension is equal?

Current under tension is expensive?

So, if your algorithm is suffering from a bias problem, the training set error would be high and you may find that the cross validation error will also be high.

Values given over accidental errors.

And then j subscript cv is my cause validation error is pretty much what you'd expect.

Current under tension is expandable?

J C V and J

The answer is this.

Secretariat wins by 31 lengths!

And similarly, I'm then also going to define the cross validation set error when the test set error, as before to be the average sum of squared errors on the cross validation and the test sets.

I'm going to have to increase the voltage.

If you draw a curve like this, your quadratic error becomes 2.

If I go to my output for 100 steps, I find that the y value is between 0.7 and 0.9.

The unstandardized regression coefficient, B.

It was 22 miles.

Yeah. I would agree with that.

Let's look at the training error and cause validation error and plot them on this figure.

There's always a little fluctuation from sample to sample.

Whereas, your cross validation error, assuming that this say the squared error which we're trying to minimize.

Of course, we won't do that. We'll just do it in R.

Here's what I mean.

I've discovered the test has a margin of error.

There's your margin of error.

So one fundamental lesson to take away from that simple example is look at your residuals.

learning algorithm and it is not performing as well as your are hoping, so your cross validation set error or your test set error is high.

Right, that's sampling error. And how much sampling error we expect on average is standard error.

It says, High Voltage. Yeah. Okay. Good.

A phillips screwdriver and a voltage sensing screwdriver or volt meter

Give me an AC pressure reading.

Make the call. I want some leverage.

well, you'll have to crank it, won't you?

Sometimes there is an alternative test sets metric that might be easier to interpret, and that's the misclassification error.