The DOI matches its Crossref record; 55 of the 55 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Deep ROC Analysis and AUC as Balanced Average Accuracy, for Improved Classifier Selection, Audit and Explanation
Open accessAbstract
Optimal performance is desired for decision-making in any field with binary classifiers and diagnostic tests, however common performance measures lack depth in information. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and the area under the precision recall curve are too general because they evaluate all decision thresholds including unrealistic ones. Conversely, accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and the F1 score are too specific-they are measured at a single threshold that is optimal for some instances, but not others, which is not equitable. In between both approaches, we propose deep ROC analysis to measure performance in multiple groups of predicted risk (like calibration), or groups of true positive rate or false positive rate. In each group, we measure the group AUC (properly), normalized group AUC, and averages of: sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value, and likelihood ratio positive and negative. The measurements can be compared between groups, to whole measures, to point measures and between models. We also provide a new interpretation of AUC in whole or part, as balanced average accuracy, relevant to individuals instead of pairs. We evaluate models in three case studies using our method and Python toolkit and confirm its utility.
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
An introduction to ROC analysis
Fawcett, T. (2006) · Pattern Recognition Letters · doi:10.1016/j.patrec.2005.10.010 · Cited by 21,879
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
The use of the area under the ROC curve in the evaluation of machine learning algorithms
Bradley, A. P. (1997) · Pattern Recognition · doi:10.1016/s0031-3203(96)00142-2 · Cited by 7,217
Decision curve analysis: a novel method for evaluating prediction models
Vickers, A. J., & Elkin, E. B. (2006) · Medical Decision Making · doi:10.1177/0272989x06295361 · Cited by 6,341
Basic principles of ROC analysis
Metz, C. E. (1978) · Seminars in Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.1016/s0001-2998(78)80014-2 · Cited by 6,026
Saito, T., & Rehmsmeier, M. (2015) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0118432 · Cited by 5,309
Assessing the Performance of Prediction Models: A Framework for Traditional and Novel Measures
Steyerberg, E. W., Vickers, A. J., Cook, N. R., Gerds, T., Gonen, M., Obuchowski, N., Pencina, M. J., & Kattan, M. W. (2010) · Epidemiology · doi:10.1097/ede.0b013e3181c30fb2 · Cited by 5,170
Collins, G. S., Reitsma, J. B., Altman, D. G., & Moons, K. G. M. (2015) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.g7594 · Cited by 4,388
AUC: A misleading measure of the performance of predictive distribution models
Lobo, J. M., Jiménez‐Valverde, A., & Real, R. (2008) · Global Ecology and Biogeography · doi:10.1111/j.1466-8238.2007.00358.x · Cited by 3,499
STARD 2015 guidelines for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies: explanation and elaboration
Cohen, J. F., Korevaar, D. A., Altman, D. G., Bruns, D. E., Gatsonis, C. A., Hooft, L., Irwig, L., Levine, D., Reitsma, J. B., de Vet, H. C. W., et al. (2016) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012799 · Cited by 2,570
Cited by
Yang, G., Ye, Q., & Xia, J. (2022) · Information Fusion · doi:10.1016/j.inffus.2021.07.016 · Cited by 717
Albahri, A. S., Duhaim, A. M., Fadhel, M. A., Alnoor, A., Baqer, N. S., Alzubaidi, L., Albahri, O. S., Alamoodi, A. H., Bai, J., Salhi, A., et al. (2023) · Information Fusion · doi:10.1016/j.inffus.2023.03.008 · Cited by 716
AI for life: Trends in artificial intelligence for biotechnology
Holzinger, A., Keiblinger, K., Holub, P., Zatloukal, K., & Müller, H. (2023) · New Biotechnology · doi:10.1016/j.nbt.2023.02.001 · Cited by 438
Self-citationA review on the recent applications of deep learning in predictive drug toxicological studies
Sinha, K., Ghosh, N., & Sil, P. C. (2023) · Chemical Research in Toxicology · doi:10.1021/acs.chemrestox.2c00375 · Cited by 64
Marchesi, R., Micheletti, N., I-Hsien Kuo, N., Barbieri, S., Jurman, G., & Osmani, V. (2025) · PLOS Computational Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1013080 · Cited by 29
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Carrington, A. M., Manuel, D. G., Fieguth, P. W., Ramsay, T., Osmani, V., Wernly, B., Bennett, C., Hawken, S., Magwood, O., Sheikh, Y., McInnes, M., & Holzinger, A.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence
- Published
- 2023-01-01
- Volume
- 45
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 329-341
- ISSN
- 0162-8828 (ISSN-L)
- 2160-9292
- 1939-3539
- OpenAlex
- W4210494925
- Cited by
- 339
- References
- 55
- FWCI
- 21.41
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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: Deep ROC Analysis and AUC as Balanced Average Accuracy, for Improved Classifier Selection, Audit and Explanation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tpami.2022.3145392
- The paper
- Carrington, A. M., Manuel, D. G., Fieguth, P. W., Ramsay, T., Osmani, V., Wernly, B., Bennett, C., Hawken, S., Magwood, O., Sheikh, Y., McInnes, M., & Holzinger, A. (2023). Deep ROC Analysis and AUC as Balanced Average Accuracy, for Improved Classifier Selection, Audit and Explanation. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence. https://doi.org/10.1109/tpami.2022.3145392
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.
