Enhancing classification performance in imbalanced datasets: A comparative analysis of machine learning models

IF 2.8
Lindani Dube, Tanja Verster
{"title":"Enhancing classification performance in imbalanced datasets: A comparative analysis of machine learning models","authors":"Lindani Dube, Tanja Verster","doi":"10.3934/dsfe.2023021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<abstract><p>In the realm of machine learning, where data-driven insights guide decision-making, addressing the challenges posed by class imbalance in datasets has emerged as a crucial concern. The effectiveness of classification algorithms hinges not only on their intrinsic capabilities but also on their adaptability to uneven class distributions, a common issue encountered across diverse domains. This study delves into the intricate interplay between varying class imbalance levels and the performance of ten distinct classification models, unravelling the critical impact of this imbalance on the landscape of predictive analytics. Results showed that random forest (RF) and decision tree (DT) models outperformed others, exhibiting robustness to class imbalance. Logistic regression (LR), stochastic gradient descent classifier (SGDC) and naïve Bayes (NB) models struggled with imbalanced datasets. Adaptive boosting (ADA), gradient boosting (GB), extreme gradient boosting (XGB), light gradient boosting machine (LGBM), and k-nearest neighbour (kNN) models improved with balanced data. Adaptive synthetic sampling (ADASYN) yielded more reliable predictions than the under-sampling (UNDER) technique. This study provides insights for practitioners and researchers dealing with imbalanced datasets, guiding model selection and data balancing techniques. RF and DT models demonstrate superior performance, while LR, SGDC and NB models have limitations. By leveraging the strengths of RF and DT models and addressing class imbalance, classification performance in imbalanced datasets can be enhanced. This study enriches credit risk modelling literature by revealing how class imbalance impacts default probability estimation. The research deepens our understanding of class imbalance's critical role in predictive analytics. Serving as a roadmap for practitioners and researchers dealing with imbalanced data, the findings guide model selection and data balancing strategies, enhancing classification performance despite class imbalance.</p></abstract>","PeriodicalId":290300,"journal":{"name":"Data Science in Finance and Economics","volume":"27 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Data Science in Finance and Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3934/dsfe.2023021","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In the realm of machine learning, where data-driven insights guide decision-making, addressing the challenges posed by class imbalance in datasets has emerged as a crucial concern. The effectiveness of classification algorithms hinges not only on their intrinsic capabilities but also on their adaptability to uneven class distributions, a common issue encountered across diverse domains. This study delves into the intricate interplay between varying class imbalance levels and the performance of ten distinct classification models, unravelling the critical impact of this imbalance on the landscape of predictive analytics. Results showed that random forest (RF) and decision tree (DT) models outperformed others, exhibiting robustness to class imbalance. Logistic regression (LR), stochastic gradient descent classifier (SGDC) and naïve Bayes (NB) models struggled with imbalanced datasets. Adaptive boosting (ADA), gradient boosting (GB), extreme gradient boosting (XGB), light gradient boosting machine (LGBM), and k-nearest neighbour (kNN) models improved with balanced data. Adaptive synthetic sampling (ADASYN) yielded more reliable predictions than the under-sampling (UNDER) technique. This study provides insights for practitioners and researchers dealing with imbalanced datasets, guiding model selection and data balancing techniques. RF and DT models demonstrate superior performance, while LR, SGDC and NB models have limitations. By leveraging the strengths of RF and DT models and addressing class imbalance, classification performance in imbalanced datasets can be enhanced. This study enriches credit risk modelling literature by revealing how class imbalance impacts default probability estimation. The research deepens our understanding of class imbalance's critical role in predictive analytics. Serving as a roadmap for practitioners and researchers dealing with imbalanced data, the findings guide model selection and data balancing strategies, enhancing classification performance despite class imbalance.

增强不平衡数据集的分类性能:机器学习模型的比较分析
在机器学习领域,数据驱动的洞察力指导决策,解决数据集中阶级不平衡带来的挑战已经成为一个至关重要的问题。分类算法的有效性不仅取决于它们的内在能力,还取决于它们对不均匀类分布的适应性,这是在不同领域都会遇到的一个常见问题。本研究深入研究了不同类别不平衡水平与十种不同分类模型的性能之间复杂的相互作用,揭示了这种不平衡对预测分析前景的关键影响。结果表明,随机森林(RF)和决策树(DT)模型对类失衡具有较强的鲁棒性。逻辑回归(LR)、随机梯度下降分类器(SGDC)和naïve贝叶斯(NB)模型难以处理不平衡数据集。自适应增强(ADA)、梯度增强(GB)、极限梯度增强(XGB)、轻梯度增强机(LGBM)和k-最近邻(kNN)模型。自适应合成采样(ADASYN)比欠采样(UNDER)技术产生更可靠的预测。本研究为从业者和研究人员处理不平衡数据集、指导模型选择和数据平衡技术提供了见解。RF和DT模型表现出优异的性能,而LR、SGDC和NB模型则存在局限性。通过利用RF和DT模型的优势并解决类不平衡问题,可以提高不平衡数据集的分类性能。本研究通过揭示阶级失衡如何影响违约概率估计,丰富了信用风险建模文献。该研究加深了我们对阶级不平衡在预测分析中的关键作用的理解。作为从业者和研究人员处理不平衡数据的路线图,研究结果指导模型选择和数据平衡策略,提高分类性能,尽管类不平衡。</p></abstract>
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书