In this paper, we study the accuracy of values aggregated over classes predicted by a classification algorithm. The problem is that the resulting aggregates (e.g., sums of a variable) are known to be biased. The bias can be large even for highly accurate classification algorithms, in particular when dealing with class-imbalanced data. To correct this bias, the algorithm's classification error rates have to be estimated. In this estimation, two issues arise when applying existing bias correction methods. First, inaccuracies in estimating classification error rates have to be taken into account. Second, impermissible estimates, such as a negative estimate for a positive value, have to be dismissed. We show that both issues are relevant in applications where the true labels are known only for a small set of data points. We propose a novel bias correction method using Bayesian inference. The novelty of our method is that it imposes constraints on the model parameters. We show that our method solves the problem of biased classification-based aggregates as well as the two issues above, in the general setting of multi-class classification. In the empirical evaluation, using a binary classifier on a real-world dataset of company tax returns, we show that our method outperforms existing methods in terms of mean squared error.
In machine learning, the accuracy of classification-based aggregates is relatively understudied. The literature on machine learning is mainly concerned with minimizing loss for future predictions and therefore focuses on a different kind of bias. Much work deals with model selection bias and overfitting @cite_15 and sample selection bias @cite_6 . However, reducing these types of bias (by, e.g., using @math -fold cross-validation) does not necessarily reduce the bias of classification-based aggregates. This is a pitfall especially if the base rate is low, i.e., when dealing with . Of course, correctly dealing with class-imbalanced data is well-studied @cite_12 . However, as long as the classifier is not error-free, it will still result in biased aggregate predictions.
@cite_15 @cite_12 @cite_6
2124710650 2040010062 2751465153 2963178340
Classification with imbalanced datasets supposes a new challenge for researches in the framework of machine learning. This problem appears when the number of patterns that represents one of the classes of the dataset (usually the concept of interest) is much lower than in the remaining classes. Thus, the learning model must be adapted to this situation, which is very common in real applications. In this paper, a dynamic over-sampling procedure is proposed for improving the classification of imbalanced datasets with more than two classes. This procedure is incorporated into a memetic algorithm (MA) that optimizes radial basis functions neural networks (RBFNNs). To handle class imbalance, the training data are resampled in two stages. In the first stage, an over-sampling procedure is applied to the minority class to balance in part the size of the classes. Then, the MA is run and the data are over-sampled in different generations of the evolution, generating new patterns of the minimum sensitivity class (the class with the worst accuracy for the best RBFNN of the population). The methodology proposed is tested using 13 imbalanced benchmark classification datasets from well-known machine learning problems and one complex problem of microbial growth. It is compared to other neural network methods specifically designed for handling imbalanced data. These methods include different over-sampling procedures in the preprocessing stage, a threshold-moving method where the output threshold is moved toward inexpensive classes and ensembles approaches combining the models obtained with these techniques. The results show that our proposal is able to improve the sensitivity in the generalization set and obtains both a high accuracy level and a good classification level for each class. Learning from imbalanced data sets, where the number of examples of one (majority) class is much higher than the others, presents an important challenge to the machine learning community. Traditional machine learning algorithms may be biased towards the majority class, thus producing poor predictive accuracy over the minority class. In this paper, we describe a new approach that combines boosting, an ensemble-based learning algorithm, with data generation to improve the predictive power of classifiers against imbalanced data sets consisting of two classes. In the DataBoost-IM method, hard examples from both the majority and minority classes are identified during execution of the boosting algorithm. Subsequently, the hard examples are used to separately generate synthetic examples for the majority and minority classes. The synthetic data are then added to the original training set, and the class distribution and the total weights of the different classes in the new training set are rebalanced. The DataBoost-IM method was evaluated, in terms of the F-measures, G-mean and overall accuracy, against seventeen highly and moderately imbalanced data sets using decision trees as base classifiers. Our results are promising and show that the DataBoost-IM method compares well in comparison with a base classifier, a standard benchmarking boosting algorithm and three advanced boosting-based algorithms for imbalanced data set. Results indicate that our approach does not sacrifice one class in favor of the other, but produces high predictions against both minority and majority classes. The machine learning community has become increasingly concerned with the potential for bias and discrimination in predictive models. This has motivated a growing line of work on what it means for a classification procedure to be "fair." In this paper, we investigate the tension between minimizing error disparity across different population groups while maintaining calibrated probability estimates. We show that calibration is compatible only with a single error constraint (i.e. equal false-negatives rates across groups), and show that any algorithm that satisfies this relaxation is no better than randomizing a percentage of predictions for an existing classifier. These unsettling findings, which extend and generalize existing results, are empirically confirmed on several datasets. The machine learning community has become increasingly concerned with the potential for bias and discrimination in predictive models. This has motivated a growing line of work on what it means for a classification procedure to be "fair." In this paper, we investigate the tension between minimizing error disparity across different population groups while maintaining calibrated probability estimates. We show that calibration is compatible only with a single error constraint (i.e. equal false-negatives rates across groups), and show that any algorithm that satisfies this relaxation is no better than randomizing a percentage of predictions for an existing classifier. These unsettling findings, which extend and generalize existing results, are empirically confirmed on several datasets.