IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/eaiada/v24y2020i1p39-50n4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of Resampling Methods in the Class Unbalance Problem

Author

Listed:
  • Kubus Mariusz

    (Opole University of Technology, Opole, Poland)

Abstract

The purpose of many real world applications is the prediction of rare events, and the training sets are then highly unbalanced. In this case, the classifiers are biased towards the correct prediction of the majority class and they misclassify a minority class, whereas rare events are of the greater interest. To handle this problem, numerous techniques were proposed that balance the data or modify the learning algorithms. The goal of this paper is a comparison of simple random balancing methods with more sophisticated resampling methods that appeared in the literature and are available in R program. Additionally, the authors ask whether learning on the original dataset and using a shifted threshold for classification is not more competitive. The authors provide a survey from the perspective of regularized logistic regression and random forests. The results show that combining random under-sampling with random forests has an advantage over other techniques while logistic regression can be competitive in the case of highly unbalanced data.

Suggested Citation

  • Kubus Mariusz, 2020. "Evaluation of Resampling Methods in the Class Unbalance Problem," Econometrics. Advances in Applied Data Analysis, Sciendo, vol. 24(1), pages 39-50, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:vrs:eaiada:v:24:y:2020:i:1:p:39-50:n:4
    DOI: 10.15611/eada.2020.1.04
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.15611/eada.2020.1.04
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.15611/eada.2020.1.04?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. King, Gary & Zeng, Langche, 2001. "Logistic Regression in Rare Events Data," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(2), pages 137-163, January.
    2. Lee, Sauchi Stephen, 2000. "Noisy replication in skewed binary classification," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 165-191, August.
    3. Hui Zou & Trevor Hastie, 2005. "Addendum: Regularization and variable selection via the elastic net," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 67(5), pages 768-768, November.
    4. Hui Zou & Trevor Hastie, 2005. "Regularization and variable selection via the elastic net," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 67(2), pages 301-320, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kubus Mariusz, 2020. "The Influence of Unbalanced Economic Data on Feature Selection and Quality of Classifiers," Folia Oeconomica Stetinensia, Sciendo, vol. 20(1), pages 232-247, June.
    2. Tutz, Gerhard & Pößnecker, Wolfgang & Uhlmann, Lorenz, 2015. "Variable selection in general multinomial logit models," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 207-222.
    3. Oxana Babecka Kucharcukova & Jan Bruha, 2016. "Nowcasting the Czech Trade Balance," Working Papers 2016/11, Czech National Bank.
    4. Carstensen, Kai & Heinrich, Markus & Reif, Magnus & Wolters, Maik H., 2020. "Predicting ordinary and severe recessions with a three-state Markov-switching dynamic factor model," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 829-850.
    5. Hou-Tai Chang & Ping-Huai Wang & Wei-Fang Chen & Chen-Ju Lin, 2022. "Risk Assessment of Early Lung Cancer with LDCT and Health Examinations," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(8), pages 1-12, April.
    6. Margherita Giuzio, 2017. "Genetic algorithm versus classical methods in sparse index tracking," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 40(1), pages 243-256, November.
    7. Nicolaj N. Mühlbach, 2020. "Tree-based Synthetic Control Methods: Consequences of moving the US Embassy," CREATES Research Papers 2020-04, Department of Economics and Business Economics, Aarhus University.
    8. Wang, Qiao & Zhou, Wei & Cheng, Yonggang & Ma, Gang & Chang, Xiaolin & Miao, Yu & Chen, E, 2018. "Regularized moving least-square method and regularized improved interpolating moving least-square method with nonsingular moment matrices," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 325(C), pages 120-145.
    9. Dmitriy Drusvyatskiy & Adrian S. Lewis, 2018. "Error Bounds, Quadratic Growth, and Linear Convergence of Proximal Methods," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 43(3), pages 919-948, August.
    10. Mkhadri, Abdallah & Ouhourane, Mohamed, 2013. "An extended variable inclusion and shrinkage algorithm for correlated variables," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 631-644.
    11. Lucian Belascu & Alexandra Horobet & Georgiana Vrinceanu & Consuela Popescu, 2021. "Performance Dissimilarities in European Union Manufacturing: The Effect of Ownership and Technological Intensity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-19, September.
    12. Candelon, B. & Hurlin, C. & Tokpavi, S., 2012. "Sampling error and double shrinkage estimation of minimum variance portfolios," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 511-527.
    13. Susan Athey & Guido W. Imbens & Stefan Wager, 2018. "Approximate residual balancing: debiased inference of average treatment effects in high dimensions," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 80(4), pages 597-623, September.
    14. Andrea Carriero & Todd E. Clark & Massimiliano Marcellino, 2022. "Specification Choices in Quantile Regression for Empirical Macroeconomics," Working Papers 22-25, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland.
    15. Kim, Hyun Hak & Swanson, Norman R., 2018. "Mining big data using parsimonious factor, machine learning, variable selection and shrinkage methods," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 339-354.
    16. Shuichi Kawano, 2014. "Selection of tuning parameters in bridge regression models via Bayesian information criterion," Statistical Papers, Springer, vol. 55(4), pages 1207-1223, November.
    17. Yize Zhao & Matthias Chung & Brent A. Johnson & Carlos S. Moreno & Qi Long, 2016. "Hierarchical Feature Selection Incorporating Known and Novel Biological Information: Identifying Genomic Features Related to Prostate Cancer Recurrence," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 111(516), pages 1427-1439, October.
    18. Chuliá, Helena & Garrón, Ignacio & Uribe, Jorge M., 2024. "Daily growth at risk: Financial or real drivers? The answer is not always the same," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 762-776.
    19. Enrico Bergamini & Georg Zachmann, 2020. "Exploring EU’s Regional Potential in Low-Carbon Technologies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-28, December.
    20. Jie Jian & Peijun Sang & Mu Zhu, 2024. "Two Gaussian Regularization Methods for Time-Varying Networks," Journal of Agricultural, Biological and Environmental Statistics, Springer;The International Biometric Society;American Statistical Association, vol. 29(4), pages 853-873, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    class unbalance; resampling; regularized logistic regression; random forests;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C1 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General
    • C38 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables - - - Classification Methdos; Cluster Analysis; Principal Components; Factor Analysis
    • C52 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Model Evaluation, Validation, and Selection

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:vrs:eaiada:v:24:y:2020:i:1:p:39-50:n:4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.