It is important to note that Stone [2] was the first to clearly differentiate between the use of cross-validation to select the model ("cross-validatory choice") and to assess the model ("cross-validatory assessment").
To assess the model fidelity of the Houvast intervention, different assessments are conducted.
Other measures have been developed to assess the model quality.
Three project cases are used to illustrate and assess the model.
In order to assess the model for fast non-isothermal treatments, a field-assisted consolidation process was used.
We assess the model with experimental data and demonstrate higher accuracy by treating the polydisperse nature of dissolution.
20C-Reanalysis driven: RCM-simulations can be driven with Reanalysis data, to assess the model performance, i.e., the ability to reproduce the observed climate.
However, before the use of existing equations, a validation for the selection of the best allometric equation is required to assess the model bias and precision.
Therefore to assess the model validity, it was tested with an independent validation set of 100 molecules, which were never considered in any of the training phases.
As clearly illustrated in Figure 3, some parameters are constrained in different value ranges depending on which objective function is used to assess the model behavior.
105 operation conditions including variations in start of injection (SOI), injected fuel mass (FMI), and external exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) were selected to assess the model performance.
