Classification tasks are usually analysed and improved through new model architectures or hyperparameter optimisation but the underlying properties of datasets are discovered on an ad-hoc basis as errors occur. However, understanding the properties of the data is crucial in perfecting models. In this paper we analyse exactly which characteristics of a dataset best determine how difficult that dataset is for the task of text classification. We then propose an intuitive measure of difficulty for text classification datasets which is simple and fast to calculate. We show that this measure generalises to unseen data by comparing it to state-of-the-art datasets and results. This measure can be used to analyse the precise source of errors in a dataset and allows fast estimation of how difficult a dataset is to learn. We searched for this measure by training 12 classical and neural network based models on 78 real-world datasets, then use a genetic algorithm to discover the best measure of difficulty. Our difficulty-calculating code ( this https URL ) and datasets ( this http URL ) are publicly available.
One source of difficulty in a dataset is mislabelled items of data (noise). showed that filtering noise could produce large gains in model performance, potentially yielding larger improvements than hyperparameter optimisation @cite_0 . We ignored noise in this work because it can be reduced with proper data cleaning and is not a part of the true signal of the dataset. We identified four other areas of potential difficulty which we attempt to measure:
@cite_0
1595276678
Data mining and knowledge discovery aim at producing useful and reliable models from the data. Unfortunately some databases contain noisy data which perturb the generalization of the models. An important source of noise consists of mislabelled training instances. We offer a new approach which deals with improving classification accuracies by using a preliminary filtering procedure. An example is suspect when in its neighbourhood defined by a geometrical graph the proportion of examples of the same class is not significantly greater than in the database itself. Such suspect examples in the training data can be removed or relabelled. The filtered training set is then provided as input to learning algorithms. Our experiments on ten benchmarks of UCI Machine Learning Repository using 1-NN as the final algorithm show that removal gives better results than relabelling. Removing allows maintaining the generalization error rate when we introduce from 0 to 20 of noise on the class, especially when classes are well separable. The filtering method proposed is finally compared to the relaxation relabelling schema.