Question 125 - MLS-C01 discussion

The model in Experiment 1 had a high variance error because it performed well on the training data (train error = 5%) but poorly on the test data (test error = 8%). This indicates that the model was overfitting the training data and not generalizing well to new data. The model in Experiment 3 had a lower variance error because it performed similarly on the training data (train error = 5.1%) and the test data (test error = 5.4%). This indicates that the model was more robust and less sensitive to the fluctuations in the training data. The model in Experiment 3 achieved this improvement by implementing regularization, which is a technique that reduces the complexity of the model and prevents overfitting by adding a penalty term to the loss function. The model in Experiment 2 had a minimal bias error because it performed similarly on the training data (train error = 5.2%) and the test data (test error = 5.7%) as the model in Experiment 1. This indicates that the model was not underfitting the data and capturing the true relationship between the input and output variables. The model in Experiment 2 increased the number of layers and neurons in the model, which is a way to increase the complexity and flexibility of the model. However, this did not improve the performance of the model, as the variance error remained high. This shows that increasing the complexity of the model is not always the best way to reduce the bias error, and may even increase the variance error if the model becomes too complex for the data.References:

Bias Variance Tradeoff - Clearly Explained - Machine Learning Plus

The Bias-Variance Trade-off in Machine Learning - Stack Abuse