Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35967970›Full record

ArticleF1000Research2022

Formal definition of the MARS method for quantifying the unique target class discoveries of selected machine classifiers.

Felipe Restrepo, Namrata Mali, Alan Abrahams, Peter Ractham

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in F1000Research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 96% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Felipe RestrepoDepartment of Industrial and Systems Engineering Information,, Virginia Tech, Virgina, 24061, USA.
Namrata MaliDepartment of Computer Science, Virginia Tech, Virginia, 24061, USA.
Alan AbrahamsDepartment of Business Information Technology, Virginia Tech, Virginia, 24061, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4884-3192
Peter RacthamDepartment of Management Information Systems, Thammasat University, Bangkok, 10200, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0003-3164-5437
Virginia Tech · USThammasat University · TH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Conventional binary classification performance metrics evaluate either general measures (accuracy, F score) or specific aspects (precision, recall) of a model's classifying ability. As such, these metrics, derived from the model's confusion matrix, provide crucial insight regarding classifier-data interactions. However, modern- day computational capabilities have allowed for the creation of increasingly complex models that share nearly identical classification performance. While traditional performance metrics remain as essential indicators of a classifier's individual capabilities, their ability to differentiate between models is limited. In this paper, we present the methodology for MARS (Method for Assessing Relative Sensitivity/ Specificity) ShineThrough and MARS Occlusion scores, two novel binary classification performance metrics, designed to quantify the distinctiveness of a classifier's predictive successes and failures, relative to alternative classifiers. Being able to quantitatively express classifier uniqueness adds a novel classifier-classifier layer to the process of model evaluation and could improve ensemble model-selection decision making. By calculating both conventional performance measures, and proposed MARS metrics for a simple classifier prediction dataset, we demonstrate that the proposed metrics' informational strengths synergize well with those of traditional metrics, delivering insight complementary to that of conventional metrics.

Indexed as

Sensitivity and SpecificityBinary classificationClassifier comparative uniquenessClassifier performance evaluationClassifier selection optimizationMachine learning

Identifiers

PMID35967970
PMCPMC9350436
OpenAlexW4225597457

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.