Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38186922›Full record

ArticlePattern recognition letters2024

On the bias in the AUC variance estimate.

Jingyan Xu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pattern recognition letters, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
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

1 author.

Jingyan XuDepartment of Radiology, Johns Hopkins University, MD, USA.

Funding

DL-based CT image formation with characterization and control of resolution and noiseR21EB033426 · NIBIB · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI XU, JINGYAN · 2023 to 2025
$658k
NIBIB NIH HHS R21 EB033426
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) is a standard metric for quantifying and comparing binary classifiers. A popular approach to estimating the AUCs and the associated variabilities - the variance of the AUC or the full covariance matrix of multiple correlated AUCs - is the one proposed by DeLong et al [1], which is based on the Mann Whitney two-sample U-statistics. The bias of a variance estimator is an important factor in applications such as hypothesis testing and construction of confidence intervals - a negatively biased variance estimator may lead to incorrect conclusions, and a positive bias is conservative hence preferable. In this work, we show that the (co-)variance estimate in DeLong's approach is always positively biased. More specifically, the difference matrix between the expectation of the estimated covariance and the true covariance is a positive semi-definite matrix. This bias is non-negligible when the sample size is small, and quickly diminishes as the sample size increases. Our method relies on constructing, from the AUC kernel, a random variable whose (co-)variance matrix coincides with the bias, thereby establishing the claim. We also discuss alternative approaches to AUC variance estimation that may potentially reduce the bias.

Indexed as

ANOVAarea under the ROC curve (AUC)binary classificationH-decompositionjackknifereceiver operating characteristic (ROC)structural components

Identifiers

PMID38186922
PMCPMC10768968

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.