Evaluation of Performance Measures for Classifiers Comparison

The selection of the best classification algorithm for a given dataset is a very widespread problem, occuring each time one has to choose a classifier to solve a real-world problem. It is also a complex task with many important methodological decisions to make. Among those, one of the most crucial is the choice of an appropriate measure in order to properly assess the classification performance and rank the algorithms. In this article, we focus on this specific task. We present the most popular measures and compare their behavior through discrimination plots. We then discuss their properties from a more theoretical perspective. It turns out several of them are equivalent for classifiers comparison purposes. Futhermore. they can also lead to interpretation problems. Among the numerous measures proposed over the years, it appears that the classical overall success rate and marginal rates are the more suitable for classifier comparison task

Adaptive imputation of missing values for incomplete pattern classification

In classification of incomplete pattern, the missing values can either play a crucial role in the class determination, or have only little influence (or eventually none) on the classification results according to the context. We propose a credal classification method for incomplete pattern with adaptive imputation of missing values based on belief function theory. At first, we try to classify the object (incomplete pattern) based only on the available attribute values. As underlying principle, we assume that the missing information is not crucial for the classification if a specific class for the object can be found using only the available information. In this case, the object is committed to this particular class. However, if the object cannot be classified without ambiguity, it means that the missing values play a main role for achieving an accurate classification. In this case, the missing values will be imputed based on the K-nearest neighbor (K-NN) and self-organizing map (SOM) techniques, and the edited pattern with the imputation is then classified. The (original or edited) pattern is respectively classified according to each training class, and the classification results represented by basic belief assignments are fused with proper combination rules for making the credal classification. The object is allowed to belong with different masses of belief to the specific classes and meta-classes (which are particular disjunctions of several single classes). The credal classification captures well the uncertainty and imprecision of classification, and reduces effectively the rate of misclassifications thanks to the introduction of meta-classes. The effectiveness of the proposed method with respect to other classical methods is demonstrated based on several experiments using artificial and real data sets

Accuracy Measures for the Comparison of Classifiers

The selection of the best classification algorithm for a given dataset is a very widespread problem. It is also a complex one, in the sense it requires to make several important methodological choices. Among them, in this work we focus on the measure used to assess the classification performance and rank the algorithms. We present the most popular measures and discuss their properties. Despite the numerous measures proposed over the years, many of them turn out to be equivalent in this specific case, to have interpretation problems, or to be unsuitable for our purpose. Consequently, classic overall success rate or marginal rates should be preferred for this specific task.Comment: The 5th International Conference on Information Technology, amman : Jordanie (2011