Võrdle meetodeid
Vaata valitud meetodeid kõrvuti; erinevad read on esile tõstetud.
| Tõlgendustabel× | Spetsiifilisus× | |
|---|---|---|
| Valdkond | Mudelite hindamine | Mudelite hindamine |
| Perekond | MCDM | MCDM |
| Tekkeaasta | 20th century | 20th century |
| Looja≠ | Statistical foundations | Historical statistical foundations |
| Tüüp≠ | Evaluation visualization | Evaluation metric |
| Algallikas≠ | Everitt, B. S., & Hothorn, T. (2005). A Handbook of Statistical Analyses Using R. Chapman and Hall/CRC. link ↗ | Fawcett, T. (2006). An introduction to ROC analysis. Pattern Recognition Letters, 27(8), 861-874. DOI ↗ |
| Rööpnimetused | Error Matrix, Contingency Table | True Negative Rate, TNR |
| Seotud | 5 | 5 |
| Kokkuvõte≠ | The confusion matrix is a table that displays the counts of true positives, true negatives, false positives, and false negatives. It provides a complete picture of where a classifier makes correct and incorrect predictions, enabling calculation of all other classification metrics. | Specificity measures the proportion of actual negative cases that were correctly identified as negative by the classifier. It answers the question: 'Of all the cases that were truly negative, how many did we correctly reject?' Specificity is complementary to recall and is essential when false positives are costly. |
| ScholarGateAndmestik ↗ |
|
|