分类器性能缺陷检测

David A. Cieslak, N. Chawla
{"title":"分类器性能缺陷检测","authors":"David A. Cieslak, N. Chawla","doi":"10.1109/ICDM.2007.106","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A fundamental tenet assumed by many classification algorithms is the presumption that both training and testing samples are drawn from the same distribution of data - this is the stationary distribution assumption. This entails that the past is strongly indicative of the future. However, in real world applications, many factors may alter the One True Model responsible for generating the data distribution both significantly and subtly. In circumstances violating the stationary distribution assumption, traditional validation schemes such as ten-folds and hold-out become poor performance predictors and classifier rankers. Thus, it becomes critical to discover the fracture points in classifier performance by discovering the divergence between populations. In this paper, we implement a comprehensive evaluation framework to identify bias, enabling selection of a \"correct\" classifier given the sample bias. To thoroughly evaluate the performance of classifiers within biased distributions, we consider the following three scenarios: missing completely at random (akin to stationary); missing at random; and missing not at random. The latter reflects the canonical sample selection bias problem.","PeriodicalId":233758,"journal":{"name":"Seventh IEEE International Conference on Data Mining (ICDM 2007)","volume":"417 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2007-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"18","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Detecting Fractures in Classifier Performance\",\"authors\":\"David A. Cieslak, N. Chawla\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/ICDM.2007.106\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"A fundamental tenet assumed by many classification algorithms is the presumption that both training and testing samples are drawn from the same distribution of data - this is the stationary distribution assumption. This entails that the past is strongly indicative of the future. However, in real world applications, many factors may alter the One True Model responsible for generating the data distribution both significantly and subtly. In circumstances violating the stationary distribution assumption, traditional validation schemes such as ten-folds and hold-out become poor performance predictors and classifier rankers. Thus, it becomes critical to discover the fracture points in classifier performance by discovering the divergence between populations. In this paper, we implement a comprehensive evaluation framework to identify bias, enabling selection of a \\\"correct\\\" classifier given the sample bias. To thoroughly evaluate the performance of classifiers within biased distributions, we consider the following three scenarios: missing completely at random (akin to stationary); missing at random; and missing not at random. The latter reflects the canonical sample selection bias problem.\",\"PeriodicalId\":233758,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Seventh IEEE International Conference on Data Mining (ICDM 2007)\",\"volume\":\"417 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2007-10-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"18\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Seventh IEEE International Conference on Data Mining (ICDM 2007)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICDM.2007.106\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Seventh IEEE International Conference on Data Mining (ICDM 2007)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICDM.2007.106","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 18

摘要

许多分类算法假设的一个基本原则是,假设训练样本和测试样本来自相同的数据分布——这是平稳分布假设。这意味着,过去是未来的强烈指示。然而,在现实世界的应用程序中,许多因素可能会显著或微妙地改变负责生成数据分布的One True模型。在违反平稳分布假设的情况下,传统的验证方案(如ten-fold和hold-out)成为较差的性能预测器和分类器排名器。因此,通过发现种群之间的差异来发现分类器性能的断裂点变得至关重要。在本文中,我们实现了一个全面的评估框架来识别偏差,允许在给定样本偏差的情况下选择“正确”的分类器。为了彻底评估有偏分布中分类器的性能,我们考虑以下三种情况:完全随机缺失(类似于平稳);随机失踪;而不是随意的错过。后者反映了典型样本选择偏差问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Detecting Fractures in Classifier Performance
A fundamental tenet assumed by many classification algorithms is the presumption that both training and testing samples are drawn from the same distribution of data - this is the stationary distribution assumption. This entails that the past is strongly indicative of the future. However, in real world applications, many factors may alter the One True Model responsible for generating the data distribution both significantly and subtly. In circumstances violating the stationary distribution assumption, traditional validation schemes such as ten-folds and hold-out become poor performance predictors and classifier rankers. Thus, it becomes critical to discover the fracture points in classifier performance by discovering the divergence between populations. In this paper, we implement a comprehensive evaluation framework to identify bias, enabling selection of a "correct" classifier given the sample bias. To thoroughly evaluate the performance of classifiers within biased distributions, we consider the following three scenarios: missing completely at random (akin to stationary); missing at random; and missing not at random. The latter reflects the canonical sample selection bias problem.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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