Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

Absolute Evaluation Measures for Machine Learning: A Survey

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 2507.03392 v1 pith:VOXW2PB3 submitted 2025-07-04 cs.LG

Absolute Evaluation Measures for Machine Learning: A Survey

classification cs.LG
keywords evaluationmeasuresmetricsmodelsabsolutelearningsurveyacross
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Machine Learning is a diverse field applied across various domains such as computer science, social sciences, medicine, chemistry, and finance. This diversity results in varied evaluation approaches, making it difficult to compare models effectively. Absolute evaluation measures offer a practical solution by assessing a model's performance on a fixed scale, independent of reference models and data ranges, enabling explicit comparisons. However, many commonly used measures are not universally applicable, leading to a lack of comprehensive guidance on their appropriate use. This survey addresses this gap by providing an overview of absolute evaluation metrics in ML, organized by the type of learning problem. While classification metrics have been extensively studied, this work also covers clustering, regression, and ranking metrics. By grouping these measures according to the specific ML challenges they address, this survey aims to equip practitioners with the tools necessary to select appropriate metrics for their models. The provided overview thus improves individual model evaluation and facilitates meaningful comparisons across different models and applications.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Evaluation Cards: An Interpretive Layer for AI Evaluation Reporting

    cs.AI 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    EvalCards is a composable reporting schema and monitoring tool for AI evaluations, derived from 52 papers and 10 interviews, and applied to 5,816 models and 101,843 results to surface reporting gaps.

  2. STABLEVAL: Disagreement-Aware and Stable Evaluation of AI Systems

    cs.LG 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    STABLEVAL models latent correctness and annotator confusion to deliver more stable and uncertainty-aware AI system rankings than majority-vote aggregation.

  3. STABLEVAL: Disagreement-Aware and Stable Evaluation of AI Systems

    cs.LG 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    STABLEVAL produces stable AI system rankings by modeling latent correctness and annotator confusion rather than majority vote aggregation.