Results of sensitivity analyses across different splits of the training and test sets. We created 1,000 different splits of the training and test sets, fit the RF to each training set, and then made predictions on each respective test set. We stored the Pearson correlations between human- and model-generated ratings for each iteration. Distributions therefore represent uncertainty in prediction accuracy. Means of the distributions (superimposed on respective graphs) are represented by dashed red lines.</p
Dots depict the rank correlation of parameter estimates in one run with the mean across all other ru...
The best performance (marked with an asterisk) occurred for N = 25, with fewer segments the model wa...
Performance assessment of prediction model based on different criteria; (a) comparison of statistica...
Distributions of within-participant Pearson correlations for positive and negative ratings in the tr...
<p>Note. <i>r</i> = correlations between scores predicted by the model and score for that tweet from...
<p>We trained the models with equal training sample sizes (<i>N</i><sub>1</sub> = <i>N</i><sub>2</su...
<p>Boxplot showing the distribution of recall, precision and AUC values for 1000 prediction models g...
A, B, C, and D: Each colored line indicates a result from a single random training-test set split, a...
A. Decomposing model behavior into two metrics. We examined model behavior along two specific aspect...
<p>We also compared here two combinations of training – candidate sets (i.e. the two figures on the ...
<p>Psychophysical (open symbols) and model (closed symbols) direction discrimination performances ar...
<p>The classification accuracy is plotted over different number of training samples. For a given num...
Prediction error distributions of four models with different training sample sizes.</p
Each point indicates a model performance estimate in the training set (X axis) and its gap from the ...
<p>Results are showed on simple and complex traits through the 10 replicates of the simulation. Figu...
Dots depict the rank correlation of parameter estimates in one run with the mean across all other ru...
The best performance (marked with an asterisk) occurred for N = 25, with fewer segments the model wa...
Performance assessment of prediction model based on different criteria; (a) comparison of statistica...
Distributions of within-participant Pearson correlations for positive and negative ratings in the tr...
<p>Note. <i>r</i> = correlations between scores predicted by the model and score for that tweet from...
<p>We trained the models with equal training sample sizes (<i>N</i><sub>1</sub> = <i>N</i><sub>2</su...
<p>Boxplot showing the distribution of recall, precision and AUC values for 1000 prediction models g...
A, B, C, and D: Each colored line indicates a result from a single random training-test set split, a...
A. Decomposing model behavior into two metrics. We examined model behavior along two specific aspect...
<p>We also compared here two combinations of training – candidate sets (i.e. the two figures on the ...
<p>Psychophysical (open symbols) and model (closed symbols) direction discrimination performances ar...
<p>The classification accuracy is plotted over different number of training samples. For a given num...
Prediction error distributions of four models with different training sample sizes.</p
Each point indicates a model performance estimate in the training set (X axis) and its gap from the ...
<p>Results are showed on simple and complex traits through the 10 replicates of the simulation. Figu...
Dots depict the rank correlation of parameter estimates in one run with the mean across all other ru...
The best performance (marked with an asterisk) occurred for N = 25, with fewer segments the model wa...
Performance assessment of prediction model based on different criteria; (a) comparison of statistica...