Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

Databricks Exam Databricks-Certified-Professional-Data-Scientist Topic 5 Question 70 Discussion

Actual exam question for Databricks's Databricks Certified Professional Data Scientist Exam exam
Question #: 70
Topic #: 5
[All Databricks Certified Professional Data Scientist Exam Questions]

Under which circumstance do you need to implement N-fold cross-validation after creating a regression model?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: B

Contribute your Thoughts:

Felix
5 days ago
If the data is unformatted, I'd say you need a crystal ball and a unicorn to solve this problem. Cross-validation ain't gonna cut it, my friend.
upvoted 0 times
...
Elbert
7 days ago
C is the way to go. Missing values? Time for some good old-fashioned cross-validation to the rescue!
upvoted 0 times
...
Mollie
9 days ago
I believe we should also consider using cross-validation if there is not enough data to create a test set.
upvoted 0 times
...
Marg
11 days ago
I agree with Darrin. Cross-validation helps in estimating the model's performance when there are missing values.
upvoted 0 times
...
Darrin
12 days ago
I think we need to implement N-fold cross-validation when there are missing values in the data.
upvoted 0 times
...
Billye
12 days ago
Hmm, I'm not sure. Wouldn't you want to do cross-validation regardless of the data issues? Better safe than overfitting, am I right?
upvoted 0 times
...
Yuriko
21 days ago
D makes the most sense to me. Handling categorical variables is tricky, and cross-validation can help ensure the model generalizes well.
upvoted 0 times
...
Dominga
25 days ago
I'd go with B. If there's not enough data for a test set, cross-validation is a great way to get a reliable performance estimate.
upvoted 0 times
Rosita
11 days ago
B) There is not enough data to create a test set.
upvoted 0 times
...
...

Save Cancel