Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Improved Sampling Techniques for Learning an Imbalanced Data Set

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1601.04756 v1 pith:VAAOJDZH submitted 2016-01-18 cs.LG

classification cs.LG
keywords samplingtechniquesdataoversamplingperformancerandomclassifierf-measure
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

This paper presents the performance of a classifier built using the stackingC algorithm in nine different data sets. Each data set is generated using a sampling technique applied on the original imbalanced data set. Five new sampling techniques are proposed in this paper (i.e., SMOTERandRep, Lax Random Oversampling, Lax Random Undersampling, Combined-Lax Random Oversampling Undersampling, and Combined-Lax Random Undersampling Oversampling) that were based on the three sampling techniques (i.e., Random Undersampling, Random Oversampling, and Synthetic Minority Oversampling Technique) usually used as solutions in imbalance learning. The metrics used to evaluate the classifier's performance were F-measure and G-mean. F-measure determines the performance of the classifier for every class, while G-mean measures the overall performance of the classifier. The results using F-measure showed that for the data without a sampling technique, the classifier's performance is good only for the majority class. It also showed that among the eight sampling techniques, RU and LRU have the worst performance while other techniques (i.e., RO, C-LRUO and C-LROU) performed well only on some classes. The best performing techniques in all data sets were SMOTE, SMOTERandRep, and LRO having the lowest F-measure values between 0.5 and 0.65. The results using G-mean showed that the oversampling technique that attained the highest G-mean value is LRO (0.86), next is C-LROU (0.85), then SMOTE (0.84) and finally is SMOTERandRep (0.83). Combining the result of the two metrics (F-measure and G-mean), only the three sampling techniques are considered as good performing (i.e., LRO, SMOTE, and SMOTERandRep).

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Ustnlp16 at SemEval-2025 Task 9: Improving Model Performance through Imbalance Handling and Focal Loss

    cs.CL 2025-04 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    On the SemEval-2025 food hazard detection task, Easy Data Augmentation outperformed oversampling and focal loss combinations, raising BERT's product-label accuracy from 0.22 to 0.55.

Pith tools