The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Optimal Thresholding of Classifiers to Maximize F1 Measure
Open accessAbstract
This paper provides new insight into maximizing F1 measures in the context of binary classification and also in the context of multilabel classification. The harmonic mean of precision and recall, the F1 measure is widely used to evaluate the success of a binary classifier when one class is rare. Micro average, macro average, and per instance average F1 measures are used in multilabel classification. For any classifier that produces a real-valued output, we derive the relationship between the best achievable F1 value and the decision-making threshold that achieves this optimum. As a special case, if the classifier outputs are well-calibrated conditional probabilities, then the optimal threshold is half the optimal F1 value. As another special case, if the classifier is completely uninformative, then the optimal behavior is to classify all examples as positive. When the actual prevalence of positive examples is low, this behavior can be undesirable. As a case study, we discuss the results, which can be surprising, of maximizing F1 when predicting 26,853 labels for Medline documents.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Introduction to information retrieval
(2009) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.46-2715 · Cited by 12,278
Introduction to Information Retrieval
Manning, C. D., Raghavan, P., & Schütze, H. (2008) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511809071 · Cited by 11,288
A systematic analysis of performance measures for classification tasks
Sokolova, M., & Lapalme, G. (2009) · Information Processing & Management · doi:10.1016/j.ipm.2009.03.002 · Cited by 7,515
Cited by
Chicco, D., & Jurman, G. (2020) · BMC Genomics · doi:10.1186/s12864-019-6413-7 · Cited by 6,143
“In multiclass cases, researchers can employ the F 1 micro/macro averaging procedure [55–60], which can be even targeted for ad-hoc optimization [61].”
Optimal classifier for imbalanced data using Matthews Correlation Coefficient metric
Boughorbel, S., Jarray, F., & El-Anbari, M. (2017) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0177678 · Cited by 1,222
Artificial intelligence for mental health and mental illnesses: an overview
Graham, S., Depp, C., Lee, E. E., Nebeker, C., Tu, X., Kim, H.-C., & Jeste, D. V. (2019) · Current Psychiatry Reports · doi:10.1007/s11920-019-1094-0 · Cited by 970
The limits of fair medical imaging AI in real-world generalization
Yang, Y., Zhang, H., Gichoya, J. W., Katabi, D., & Ghassemi, M. (2024) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41591-024-03113-4 · Cited by 285
Algorithms that remember: model inversion attacks and data protection law
Veale, M., Binns, R., & Edwards, L. (2018) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences · doi:10.1098/rsta.2018.0083 · Cited by 278
Metadata
- Authors
- Lipton, Z. C., Elkan, C., & Naryanaswamy, B.
- Venue
- Lecture Notes in Computer Science
- Publisher
- Springer Berlin Heidelberg
- Published
- 2014
- Volume
- 8725
- Pages
- 225-239
- ISSN
- 0302-9743 (ISSN-L)
- 1611-3349
- OpenAlex
- W61851215
- Cited by
- 596
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 5.73
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Optimal Thresholding of Classifiers to Maximize F1 Measure. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/978-3-662-44851-9_15
- The paper
- Lipton, Z. C., Elkan, C., & Naryanaswamy, B. (2014). Optimal Thresholding of Classifiers to Maximize F1 Measure. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-44851-9_15
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.