Notebooks: Fixing wrong images & typos in validation series

[validbeck]

Pull Request Description

What

I found some typoes and incorrect images in the validation notebook series I didn't catch the first few rounds

Why

typoes and incorrect images misleading

How to Test

You can just review the changed files on GitHub!

diff

Pull Request Dependencies

This PR affects a WIP PR (not yet on remote) in the documentation repo that requires these updated fixes.

Checklist

• PR body describes what, why, and how to test
• Release notes written — N/A
• Deployment notes written — N/A
• Breaking changes identified — N/A
• Labels applied
• PR linked to Shortcut — N/A
• Screenshots/videos added (Frontend) — N/A
• Unit tests added (Backend) — N/A
• Tested locally
• Documentation updated (if required) — Will pull these changes into my working documentation PR.

Additional Notes

new PR template slaps thanks @nibalizer!

[gtagle]

moar bettar

[github-actions]

PR Summary

This pull request updates the documentation in the Jupyter notebooks related to model validation and evaluation processes. The changes primarily involve correcting and clarifying section titles to better reflect the content and purpose of the sections.

1. In the 2-start_validation_process.ipynb notebook, the section title "Log tests with a unique identifiers" was corrected to "Log tests with unique identifiers" to improve grammatical accuracy.

2. In the 3-developing_challenger_model.ipynb notebook, the section title "Running model validation tests" was updated to "Running model evaluation tests" to more accurately describe the focus of the section, which is on evaluating model performance rather than just validation.

These changes aim to enhance the clarity and readability of the documentation for users following the tutorials.

Test Suggestions

• Verify that the updated section titles in the Jupyter notebooks render correctly and are linked properly in the table of contents.
• Ensure that the changes do not affect the execution of the notebooks and that all cells run without errors.
• Check that the documentation changes are consistent with the actual content and purpose of the sections.