The DOI matches its Crossref record; 37 of the 37 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Comparison of Undersampling, Oversampling, and SMOTE Methods for Dealing with Imbalanced Classification in Educational Data Mining
Open accessAbstract
Educational data mining is capable of producing useful data-driven applications (e.g., early warning systems in schools or the prediction of students’ academic achievement) based on predictive models. However, the class imbalance problem in educational datasets could hamper the accuracy of predictive models as many of these models are designed on the assumption that the predicted class is balanced. Although previous studies proposed several methods to deal with the imbalanced class problem, most of them focused on the technical details of how to improve each technique, while only a few focused on the application aspect, especially for the application of data with different imbalance ratios. In this study, we compared several sampling techniques to handle the different ratios of the class imbalance problem (i.e., moderately or extremely imbalanced classifications) using the High School Longitudinal Study of 2009 dataset. For our comparison, we used random oversampling (ROS), random undersampling (RUS), and the combination of the synthetic minority oversampling technique for nominal and continuous (SMOTE-NC) and RUS as a hybrid resampling technique. We used the Random Forest as our classification algorithm to evaluate the results of each sampling technique. Our results show that random oversampling for moderately imbalanced data and hybrid resampling for extremely imbalanced data seem to work best. The implications for educational data mining applications and suggestions for future research are discussed.
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
Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python
Pedregosa, F., Varoquaux, G., Gramfort, A., Michel, V., Thirion, B., Grisel, O., Blondel, M., Müller, A., Nothman, J., Louppe, G., et al. (2012) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1201.0490 · Cited by 71,016
SMOTE synthetic minority over-sampling technique
Chawla, N. V., Bowyer, K. W., Hall, L. O., & Kegelmeyer, W. P. (2002) · Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research · doi:10.1613/jair.953 · Cited by 32,865
Wickham, H., Averick, M., Bryan, J., Chang, W., McGowan, L., François, R., Grolemund, G., Hayes, A., Henry, L., Hester, J., et al. (2019) · Journal of Open Source Software · doi:10.21105/joss.01686 · Cited by 22,138
(2010) · University of Twente Research Information · Cited by 6,037
The class imbalance problem: A systematic study1
Japkowicz, N., & Stephen, S. (2002) · Intelligent Data Analysis · doi:10.3233/ida-2002-6504 · Cited by 3,295
Survey on deep learning with class imbalance
Johnson, J. M., & Khoshgoftaar, T. M. (2019) · Journal of Big Data · doi:10.1186/s40537-019-0192-5 · Cited by 3,032
Learning from class-imbalanced data: Review of methods and applications
Haixiang, G., Yijing, L., Shang, J., Mingyun, G., Yuanyue, H., & Bing, G. (2017) · Expert Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2016.12.035 · Cited by 2,377
Asymptotic Properties of Nearest Neighbor Rules Using Edited Data
Wilson, D. L. (1972) · IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics · doi:10.1109/tsmc.1972.4309137 · Cited by 2,130
Imbalanced-learn: A Python Toolbox to Tackle the Curse of Imbalanced Datasets in Machine Learning
Lemaître, G., Nogueira, F., & Aridas, C. K. (2016) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1609.06570 · Cited by 1,514
Improving imbalanced learning through a heuristic oversampling method based on k-means and SMOTE
Douzas, G., Bacao, F., & Last, F. (2018) · Information Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.ins.2018.06.056 · Cited by 1,277
Cited by
Zhu, L., Liu, G., Lv, S., Chen, D., Chen, Z., & Li, X. (2023) · Information · doi:10.3390/info14060317 · Cited by 12
Enhancing machine learning algorithm performance for PCOS diagnosis using SMOTENC on imbalanced data
Dewi, R., Sri hayati, R., Saleh, A., Hakim Tanjung, D. Y., & Jinan, A. (2025) · JITK (Jurnal Ilmu Pengetahuan dan Teknologi Komputer) · doi:10.33480/jitk.v11i1.6676 · Cited by 2
Metadata
- Authors
- Wongvorachan, T., He, S., & Bulut, O.
- Venue
- Information
- Publisher
- MDPI AG
- Published
- 2023-01-16
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 54
- ISSN
- 2078-2489 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4316469706
- Cited by
- 375
- References
- 37
- FWCI
- 32.86
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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: A Comparison of Undersampling, Oversampling, and SMOTE Methods for Dealing with Imbalanced Classification in Educational Data Mining. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3390/info14010054
- The paper
- Wongvorachan, T., He, S., & Bulut, O. (2023). A Comparison of Undersampling, Oversampling, and SMOTE Methods for Dealing with Imbalanced Classification in Educational Data Mining. Information. https://doi.org/10.3390/info14010054
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.