ArticleGigaScience2022
MLcps: machine learning cumulative performance score for classification problems.
Article in GigaScience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Application of machine learning in the research progress of post-kidney transplant rejection.World journal of transplantation · 2026Review
- HeteroMRI: Robust white matter abnormality classification across multi-scanner MRI data.GigaScience · 2025Article
- Machine Learning-Based Classification of Transcriptome Signatures of Non-Ulcerative Bladder Pain Syndrome.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Machine Learning-based Classification of transcriptome Signatures of non-ulcerative Bladder Pain Syndrome.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAssessing the performance of machine learning (ML) models requires careful consideration of the evaluation metrics used. It is often necessary to utilize multiple metrics to gain a comprehensive understanding of a trained model's performance, as each metric focuses on a specific aspect. However, comparing the scores of these individual metrics for each model to determine the best-performing model can be time-consuming and susceptible to subjective user preferences, potentially introducing bias.
resultsWe propose the Machine Learning Cumulative Performance Score (MLcps), a novel evaluation metric for classification problems. MLcps integrates several precomputed evaluation metrics into a unified score, enabling a comprehensive assessment of the trained model's strengths and weaknesses. We tested MLcps on 4 publicly available datasets, and the results demonstrate that MLcps provides a holistic evaluation of the model's robustness, ensuring a thorough understanding of its overall performance.
conclusionsBy utilizing MLcps, researchers and practitioners no longer need to individually examine and compare multiple metrics to identify the best-performing models. Instead, they can rely on a single MLcps value to assess the overall performance of their ML models. This streamlined evaluation process saves valuable time and effort, enhancing the efficiency of model evaluation. MLcps is available as a Python package at https://pypi.org/project/MLcps/.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.