IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0316019.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Area under the ROC Curve has the most consistent evaluation for binary classification

Author

Listed:
  • Jing Li

Abstract

The proper use of model evaluation metrics is important for model evaluation and model selection in binary classification tasks. This study investigates how consistent different metrics are at evaluating models across data of different prevalence while the relationships between different variables and the sample size are kept constant. Analyzing 156 data scenarios, 18 model evaluation metrics and five commonly used machine learning models as well as a naive random guess model, I find that evaluation metrics that are less influenced by prevalence offer more consistent evaluation of individual models and more consistent ranking of a set of models. In particular, Area Under the ROC Curve (AUC) which takes all decision thresholds into account when evaluating models has the smallest variance in evaluating individual models and smallest variance in ranking of a set of models. A close threshold analysis using all possible thresholds for all metrics further supports the hypothesis that considering all decision thresholds helps reduce the variance in model evaluation with respect to prevalence change in data. The results have significant implications for model evaluation and model selection in binary classification tasks.

Suggested Citation

  • Jing Li, 2024. "Area under the ROC Curve has the most consistent evaluation for binary classification," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(12), pages 1-28, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0316019
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0316019
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0316019
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0316019&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0316019?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0316019. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.