Vertaile menetelmiä
Tarkastele valitsemiasi menetelmiä rinnakkain; eroavat rivit korostetaan.
| Tarkkuusmatriisi× | Matthews-korrelaatiokerroin× | Tarkkuus× | Tunnistus (herkkyys)× | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tieteenala | Mallien arviointi | Mallien arviointi | Mallien arviointi | Mallien arviointi |
| Menetelmäperhe | MCDM | MCDM | MCDM | MCDM |
| Syntyvuosi≠ | 20th century | 1975 | 20th century | 20th century |
| Kehittäjä≠ | Statistical foundations | Brian W. Matthews | Historical statistical foundations | Historical statistical foundations |
| Tyyppi≠ | Evaluation visualization | Evaluation metric | Evaluation metric | Evaluation metric |
| Alkuperäislähde≠ | Everitt, B. S., & Hothorn, T. (2005). A Handbook of Statistical Analyses Using R. Chapman and Hall/CRC. link ↗ | Matthews, B. W. (1975). Comparison of predicted and observed secondary structure of T4 phage lysozyme. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA)-Protein Structure, 405(2), 442-451. DOI ↗ | Fawcett, T. (2006). An introduction to ROC analysis. Pattern Recognition Letters, 27(8), 861-874. DOI ↗ | Fawcett, T. (2006). An introduction to ROC analysis. Pattern Recognition Letters, 27(8), 861-874. DOI ↗ |
| Rinnakkaisnimet≠ | Error Matrix, Contingency Table | Phi Coefficient, Binary Classification Correlation | Positive Predictive Value, PPV | Sensitivity, True Positive Rate, TPR |
| Liittyvät | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Tiivistelmä≠ | 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. | The Matthews Correlation Coefficient (MCC) is a correlation measure between predicted and actual binary classifications. It ranges from -1 to 1 and is considered one of the most reliable single-score metrics for evaluating binary classifiers, especially on imbalanced datasets. | Precision measures the proportion of positive predictions that were actually correct. It answers the question: 'Of all the cases we predicted as positive, how many were truly positive?' Precision is critical in scenarios where false positives are costly. | Recall measures the proportion of actual positive cases that were correctly identified by the classifier. It answers the question: 'Of all the cases that were truly positive, how many did we find?' Recall is critical in scenarios where missing positive cases is costly. |
| ScholarGateAineisto ↗ |
|
|
|
|