Imagine you're preparing for an important exam. You have a set of practice questions provided by the instructor. One way to study is to simply memorize the answers to only those specific questions. If the final exam uses the exact same questions, you'll likely score perfectly! But what happens if the exam features new questions that test the same concepts? If you only memorized, you'll probably struggle. You haven't truly learned the underlying material; you just memorized the practice set.
Machine learning models face a similar situation. When we train a model, we show it a dataset (the "practice questions") and it learns patterns from that data. If we then evaluate the model using the same data it trained on, we're essentially asking it the questions it already memorized the answers to. The model might appear to perform exceptionally well, giving us impressive accuracy or low error rates.
However, this performance is often an illusion. The model might have learned the training data too specifically, including its noise and quirks, rather than the underlying general patterns we actually care about. This phenomenon is called overfitting.
Overfitting occurs when a model learns the training data so well that it captures random fluctuations or noise specific to that data, rather than the true underlying relationship between inputs and outputs. Think of it as the model fitting the data points too tightly.
Consider a simple visual analogy:
The blue dots represent our data. A good model (green line) captures the general trend. An underfit model (yellow dashed line) is too simple and misses the trend. An overfit model (red dotted line) wiggles too much to hit every training point exactly, but it likely wouldn't predict new points well.
The true measure of a machine learning model's success isn't how well it performs on data it has already seen, but how well it performs on new, unseen data. This ability to perform well on data not used during training is called generalization.
Why is generalization so important? Because the purpose of building most models is to use them in reality, to make predictions or decisions based on data that wasn't available when the model was created.
Evaluating a model on its training data tells you almost nothing about its ability to generalize. It measures memorization, not predictive power on future data.
If you train your model and immediately test it on the same training data, you'll often get very optimistic results. An accuracy score might be near 100%, or the error rate (like MSE in regression) might be close to zero. This gives a false sense of confidence. The model might be heavily overfit, and when deployed, its actual performance could be drastically worse.
"Therefore, to get an honest assessment of how your model is likely to perform in a scenario, you must evaluate it on data it has never encountered during the training process. This unseen data acts as a proxy for the future data the model will encounter. This is the fundamental reason we need to split our data, which we will explore next."
Was this section helpful?
© 2026 ApX Machine LearningEngineered with