Salīdzināt metodes
Apskatiet izvēlētās metodes blakus; rindas, kas atšķiras, ir izceltas.
| Mikro vidējais F1 rādītājs× | Precizitāte× | |
|---|---|---|
| Nozare | Modeļu novērtēšana | Modeļu novērtēšana |
| Saime | MCDM | MCDM |
| Izcelsmes gads≠ | 2000s | 20th century |
| Autors≠ | Multi-class evaluation community | Historical statistical foundations |
| Tips | Evaluation metric | Evaluation metric |
| Pirmavots≠ | Powers, D. M. (2011). Evaluation: From Precision, Recall and F-Measure to ROC, Informedness, Markedness and Correlation. Journal of Machine Learning Technologies, 2(1), 37-63. link ↗ | Fawcett, T. (2006). An introduction to ROC analysis. Pattern Recognition Letters, 27(8), 861-874. DOI ↗ |
| Citi nosaukumi | Micro F1, Frequency-weighted average F1 | Overall Accuracy, Correct Classification Rate |
| Saistītās≠ | 4 | 5 |
| Kopsavilkums≠ | Micro-averaged F1 computes the F1-score by aggregating true positives, false positives, and false negatives across all classes, then calculating a single metric. It is equivalent to accuracy in multi-class classification and is useful when class distributions reflect their natural importance. | Accuracy is the proportion of correct predictions among the total number of predictions made by a classification model. It is the most intuitive performance metric and measures how often the classifier makes correct predictions overall, regardless of class. |
| ScholarGateDatu kopa ↗ |
|
|