【zt】!!! confusion matrix

Simple guide to confusion matrix terminology

I wanted to create a "quick reference guide" for confusion matrix terminology because I couldn't find an existing resource that suited my requirements: compact in presentation, using numbers instead of arbitrary variables, and explained both in terms of formulas and sentences.

Let's start with an example confusion matrix for a binary classifier (though it can easily be extended to the case of more than two classes):

What can we learn from this matrix?

There are two possible predicted classes: "yes" and "no". If we were predicting the presence of a disease, for example, "yes" would mean they have the disease, and "no" would mean they don't have the disease.

The classifier made a total of 165 predictions (e.g., 165 patients were being tested for the presence of that disease).

Out of those 165 cases, the classifier predicted "yes" 110 times, and "no" 55 times.

In reality, 105 patients in the sample have the disease, and 60 patients do not.

Let's now define the most basic terms, which are whole numbers (not rates):

true positives (TP): These are cases in which we predicted yes (they have the disease), and they do have the disease.

true negatives (TN): We predicted no, and they don't have the disease.

false positives (FP): We predicted yes, but they don't actually have the disease. (Also known as a "Type I error.")

false negatives (FN): We predicted no, but they actually do have the disease. (Also known as a "Type II error.")

I've added these terms to the confusion matrix, and also added the row and column totals:

This is a list of rates that are often computed from a confusion matrix for a binary classifier:

Accuracy: Overall, how often is the classifier correct?

(TP+TN)/total = (100+50)/165 = 0.91

Misclassification Rate [also known as "Error Rate"]: Overall, how often is it wrong?

(FP+FN)/total = (10+5)/165 = 0.09

equivalent to 1 minus Accuracy

True Positive Rate [also known as "Sensitivity" or "Recall"]: When it's actually yes, how often does it predict yes?

TP/actual yes = 100/105 = 0.95

False Positive Rate: When it's actually no, how often does it predict yes?

FP/actual no = 10/60 = 0.17

Specificity: When it's actually no, how often does it predict no?

TN/actual no = 50/60 = 0.83

equivalent to 1 minus False Positive Rate

Precision: When it predicts yes, how often is it correct?

TP/predicted yes = 100/110 = 0.91

Prevalence: How often does the yes condition actually occur in our sample?

actual yes/total = 105/165 = 0.64

A couple other terms are also worth mentioning:

Positive Predictive Value: This is very similar to precision, except that it takes prevalence into account. In the case where the classes are perfectly balanced (meaning the prevalence is 50%), the positive predictive value (PPV) is equivalent to precision. (More details about PPV.)

Null Error Rate: This is how often you would be wrong if you always predicted the majority class. (In our example, the null error rate would be 60/165=0.36 because if you always predicted yes, you would only be wrong for the 60 "no" cases.) This can be a useful baseline metric to compare your classifier against. However, the best classifier for a particular application will sometimes have a higher error rate than the null error rate, as demonstrated by the Accuracy Paradox.

Cohen's Kappa: This is essentially a measure of how well the classifier performed as compared to how well it would have performed simply by chance. In other words, a model will have a high Kappa score if there is a big difference between the accuracy and the null error rate. (More details about Cohen's Kappa.)

F Score: This is a weighted average of the true positive rate (recall) and precision. (More details about the F Score.)

ROC Curve: This is a commonly used graph that summarizes the performance of a classifier over all possible thresholds. It is generated by plotting the True Positive Rate (y-axis) against the False Positive Rate (x-axis) as you vary the threshold for assigning observations to a given class. (More details about ROC Curves.)

And finally, for those of you from the world of Bayesian statistics, here's a quick summary of these terms from Applied Predictive Modeling:

In relation to Bayesian statistics, the sensitivity and specificity are the conditional probabilities, the prevalence is the prior, and the positive/negative predicted values are the posterior probabilities.

原文链接:https://www.dataschool.io/simple-guide-to-confusion-matrix-terminology/

©著作权归作者所有,转载或内容合作请联系作者
  • 序言:七十年代末,一起剥皮案震惊了整个滨河市,随后出现的几起案子,更是在滨河造成了极大的恐慌,老刑警刘岩,带你破解...
    沈念sama阅读 212,185评论 6 493
  • 序言:滨河连续发生了三起死亡事件,死亡现场离奇诡异,居然都是意外死亡,警方通过查阅死者的电脑和手机,发现死者居然都...
    沈念sama阅读 90,445评论 3 385
  • 文/潘晓璐 我一进店门,熙熙楼的掌柜王于贵愁眉苦脸地迎上来,“玉大人,你说我怎么就摊上这事。” “怎么了?”我有些...
    开封第一讲书人阅读 157,684评论 0 348
  • 文/不坏的土叔 我叫张陵,是天一观的道长。 经常有香客问我,道长,这世上最难降的妖魔是什么? 我笑而不...
    开封第一讲书人阅读 56,564评论 1 284
  • 正文 为了忘掉前任,我火速办了婚礼,结果婚礼上,老公的妹妹穿的比我还像新娘。我一直安慰自己,他们只是感情好,可当我...
    茶点故事阅读 65,681评论 6 386
  • 文/花漫 我一把揭开白布。 她就那样静静地躺着,像睡着了一般。 火红的嫁衣衬着肌肤如雪。 梳的纹丝不乱的头发上,一...
    开封第一讲书人阅读 49,874评论 1 290
  • 那天,我揣着相机与录音,去河边找鬼。 笑死,一个胖子当着我的面吹牛,可吹牛的内容都是我干的。 我是一名探鬼主播,决...
    沈念sama阅读 39,025评论 3 408
  • 文/苍兰香墨 我猛地睁开眼,长吁一口气:“原来是场噩梦啊……” “哼!你这毒妇竟也来了?” 一声冷哼从身侧响起,我...
    开封第一讲书人阅读 37,761评论 0 268
  • 序言:老挝万荣一对情侣失踪,失踪者是张志新(化名)和其女友刘颖,没想到半个月后,有当地人在树林里发现了一具尸体,经...
    沈念sama阅读 44,217评论 1 303
  • 正文 独居荒郊野岭守林人离奇死亡,尸身上长有42处带血的脓包…… 初始之章·张勋 以下内容为张勋视角 年9月15日...
    茶点故事阅读 36,545评论 2 327
  • 正文 我和宋清朗相恋三年,在试婚纱的时候发现自己被绿了。 大学时的朋友给我发了我未婚夫和他白月光在一起吃饭的照片。...
    茶点故事阅读 38,694评论 1 341
  • 序言:一个原本活蹦乱跳的男人离奇死亡,死状恐怖,灵堂内的尸体忽然破棺而出,到底是诈尸还是另有隐情,我是刑警宁泽,带...
    沈念sama阅读 34,351评论 4 332
  • 正文 年R本政府宣布,位于F岛的核电站,受9级特大地震影响,放射性物质发生泄漏。R本人自食恶果不足惜,却给世界环境...
    茶点故事阅读 39,988评论 3 315
  • 文/蒙蒙 一、第九天 我趴在偏房一处隐蔽的房顶上张望。 院中可真热闹,春花似锦、人声如沸。这庄子的主人今日做“春日...
    开封第一讲书人阅读 30,778评论 0 21
  • 文/苍兰香墨 我抬头看了看天上的太阳。三九已至,却和暖如春,着一层夹袄步出监牢的瞬间,已是汗流浃背。 一阵脚步声响...
    开封第一讲书人阅读 32,007评论 1 266
  • 我被黑心中介骗来泰国打工, 没想到刚下飞机就差点儿被人妖公主榨干…… 1. 我叫王不留,地道东北人。 一个月前我还...
    沈念sama阅读 46,427评论 2 360
  • 正文 我出身青楼,却偏偏与公主长得像,于是被迫代替她去往敌国和亲。 传闻我的和亲对象是个残疾皇子,可洞房花烛夜当晚...
    茶点故事阅读 43,580评论 2 349

推荐阅读更多精彩内容

  • rljs by sennchi Timeline of History Part One The Cognitiv...
    sennchi阅读 7,312评论 0 10
  • 不知道说男人说谎张口就来,其实说谎没那么可怕吧,人生没那么多可以耽误,能爱的时候好好爱,爱自己,爱别人,该放下的时...
    君宝521阅读 247评论 0 0