<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>idea Forest-based tool: create AUC diagnostic in ArcGIS Pro Ideas</title>
    <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-pro-ideas/forest-based-tool-create-auc-diagnostic/idi-p/1517679</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;We are writing a research paper and comparing the results of our forest-based model with other models (logistic regression, SMOTE, cost-estimate). The literature review consistently shows that AUC (area under the curve), is an important parameter when evaluating the performance of classification models.&amp;nbsp;AUC represents the area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve, which plots the true positive rate (sensitivity) against the false positive rate (1-specificity) across different thresholds.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;AUC is a comprehensive measure of model performance. It provides a single scalar value that summarizes the performance of the model across all possible classification thresholds, rather than relying on one specific threshold. This gives a more holistic view of the model’s ability to discriminate between positive and negative classes.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;AUC is not dependent on a specific decision threshold, unlike accuracy or other metrics that may vary significantly with the choice of threshold. This makes AUC a robust metric for comparing models, as it reflects the model’s ability to distinguish between classes regardless of where the decision boundary is set.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;In cases where there is a significant class imbalance, metrics like accuracy can be misleading. AUC, on the other hand, is more informative because it takes into account both the sensitivity and specificity, thus giving a more balanced view of model performance even when classes are imbalanced.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;For this and many other reasons, I strongly suggest that the spatial statistics team considers adding the AUC as a diagnostic of the performance of the model when running the forest-based tool in ArcGIS Pro.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Aug 2024 19:36:45 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>patriciacdale</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2024-08-09T19:36:45Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Forest-based tool: create AUC diagnostic</title>
      <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-pro-ideas/forest-based-tool-create-auc-diagnostic/idi-p/1517679</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;We are writing a research paper and comparing the results of our forest-based model with other models (logistic regression, SMOTE, cost-estimate). The literature review consistently shows that AUC (area under the curve), is an important parameter when evaluating the performance of classification models.&amp;nbsp;AUC represents the area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve, which plots the true positive rate (sensitivity) against the false positive rate (1-specificity) across different thresholds.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;AUC is a comprehensive measure of model performance. It provides a single scalar value that summarizes the performance of the model across all possible classification thresholds, rather than relying on one specific threshold. This gives a more holistic view of the model’s ability to discriminate between positive and negative classes.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;AUC is not dependent on a specific decision threshold, unlike accuracy or other metrics that may vary significantly with the choice of threshold. This makes AUC a robust metric for comparing models, as it reflects the model’s ability to distinguish between classes regardless of where the decision boundary is set.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;In cases where there is a significant class imbalance, metrics like accuracy can be misleading. AUC, on the other hand, is more informative because it takes into account both the sensitivity and specificity, thus giving a more balanced view of model performance even when classes are imbalanced.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;For this and many other reasons, I strongly suggest that the spatial statistics team considers adding the AUC as a diagnostic of the performance of the model when running the forest-based tool in ArcGIS Pro.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Aug 2024 19:36:45 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-pro-ideas/forest-based-tool-create-auc-diagnostic/idi-p/1517679</guid>
      <dc:creator>patriciacdale</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2024-08-09T19:36:45Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

