"cross evaluation" is a correct and usable expression in written English.
It is usually used when referring to the practice of evaluating something from different perspectives. For example, "The company conducted a cross evaluation of the risks associated with the project."
Both models have good predictive ability based on residual analysis, power analysis, and cross-evaluation.
In a paper entitled Cross-evaluation of Metrics to Estimate the Significance of Creative Works, issued by Illinois' Northwestern University, the study's authors – Max Wasserman, Xiao Han T Zeng and Luís AN Amaral – analysed the "movie connections" section of the Internet Movie Database in an effort to uncover the "most cited" film – and, therefore, the most influential.
So, the problem mentioned above makes the cross-evaluation important.
In fact, there exists a problem similar to the problem of the cross-evaluation using DEA.
Figure 1 Cross-evaluation of the EEPAS and EAST R models in California for M ≥ 4.95 target earthquakes.
Contreras (2012) optimized the rank positions of alternatives as a secondary goal in cross-evaluation so that the alternatives could assume tie ranks.
The Pearson correlation and the modified RMSE in Tables 3 and 4 are the average performance over 100 runs of the cross-evaluation process.
When evaluating the performance of the features on dataset-1 or dataset-2, the dataset is partitioned into the training sub-dataset and the validation sub-dataset in 50% versus 50% proportion to perform the cross-evaluation process.
First stage is based on the cross-evaluation methodology in which (1) the rank of alternatives is computed in their best condition and (2) the individual rank of each alternative is obtained.
To underline how different forecast models may provide independent information about seismicity, we perform a cross-evaluation of the EAST R and EEPAS models using Molchan diagrams (Figure 1).
In brain imaging, sequential PET/CT vs. PET/MRI cross-evaluation studies reported an underestimation of the average PET signal in PET/MRI due to the omission of cortical bone for several tracers, ranging from 11 to 12%% [3, 4] up to 19to25%5 % [5, 6].
