Search arXiv⌕ Search

arXiv · 2610.23294

The Optimal Ranking Tradeoffs Between Two Ranking Scores in Two-Class Classification

Abstract

The accuracy, true negative rate (negative class recall), true positive rate (positive class recall), negative predictive value (negative class precision), positive predictive value (positive class precision), class-specific intersections over unions, class-specific F-scores, Cohen's kappa, and balanced accuracy are scores that one intuitively wants to maximize when developing machine learning methods. However, they lead to different rankings of such methods. So, how can we establish a ranking that is an optimal tradeoff between any pair of these scores? It turns out that all these scores are special cases of ranking scores: a continuum of scores parameterized by the relative importance values assigned to the true negative, false positive, false negative, and true positive outcomes. Since all these scores are known to induce meaningful rankings, we seek the optimal tradeoffs among them. We consider the tradeoff between two scores to be optimal when it minimizes the Fréchet variance regarding the Kendall distance (also known as the bubble-sort distance) between rankings. For any given set of classifiers to rank, the optimal tradeoff lies at the center of the shortest (geodesic) path on the manifold of all rankings induced by the ranking scores. However, in the parameter space of the ranking scores, it is rarely achieved by averaging the importance values corresponding to the initial scores. In this paper, we present an exact analytical solution for determining a ranking score that is an optimal tradeoff for any given pair of initial scores, in the common case where the class priors are the same for all compared performances. We also experimentally investigate what happens when performance follows some distributions with fixed priors.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Sébastien Piérard, Adrien Deliège, Marc Van Droogenbroeck. 2026-10-16. The Optimal Ranking Tradeoffs Between Two Ranking Scores in Two-Class Classification. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.23294

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Robust Resource Allocation for STAR-RIS-Assisted ISAC Networks Using Deep Learning

In this paper, we focus on investigating the resource allocation in an integrated sensing and communication (ISAC) system assisted by a simultaneously transmitting and reflecting reconfigurable intelligent surface (STAR-RIS). Due to the coupled non-convex nature of the optimization problem, solving the above joint resource optimization problem while guaranteeing superior sensing performance is challenging, especially in dynamic environment. To conquer such challenge, prior iterative optimization algorithms have been presented. However, practical implementations of these prior algorithms face notable computational challenges, e.g., the reliance on accurate global channel information and the assumption of ideal phase shifts. In this context, we propose a model-driven deep learning framework for jointly optimizing the transmit beamforming and waveform in ISAC networks with low-overhead. In addition, we adopt the Cramer-Rao lower bound (CRLB) as the sensing performance metric, and the multi-user interference (MUI) energy as the communication performance metric for performance evaluation. Besides, our framework jointly optimizes the transmit beamforming, waveform and the STAR-RIS reflection/transmission coefficient matrices by minimizing the weighted sum of MUI energy and CRLB. Our study also considers the impact of imperfect channel information, making the research scenario more aligned with real-world applications. Simulation results validate that the proposed framework not only achieves higher sum-rate performance comparable to traditional iterative algorithms but also significantly reduces computational complexity in terms of algorithm execution time, as well as exhibits inherent robustness.

cs.PF↗

SPLIT: SymPathy for Large jobs Improves Tail latency

We study the asymptotic response time tail in the M/G/n multi-server queue with heavy-tailed (regularly varying) job sizes, a setting representative of modern computing workloads. For single-server systems, tail optimization is well understood: under heavy-tailed job sizes, policies such as SRPT that strictly prioritize short jobs are strongly tail optimal, and giving any priority to large jobs is harmful. For multi-server systems, the question has been almost entirely open. This paper gives the first strongly tail-optimal scheduling policies for the M/G/n queue with heavy-tailed job sizes. Our central finding is that the multi-server case is intrinsically different from the single-server case: giving a small amount of ``sympathy'' to large jobs is essential for strong tail optimality. We establish strong (or arbitrarily close to strong) tail optimality across the full stability region, both with and without knowledge of job sizes.

cs.PF↗

Ride, Raise, or Wake: A Theory of Light-Thread Placement on Multi-Tier Processors

hones and laptops now mix several kinds of cores, and each kind sits in its own voltage and clock domain. When a light thread arrives, should it run beside heavy threads on a fast cluster that is already awake, or wake a cluster of efficient cores? We answer with three costs. A thread can \emph{ride} an awake domain at the voltage other threads hold, \emph{raise} that voltage for everyone, or \emph{wake} a sleeping domain and pay its fixed power. From these costs follows a simple rule: ride while the thread's demand is below $r^*=Φ/(e_h-e_l)$, the fixed power of the cluster it would wake over the gap in energy per operation; otherwise wake the smallest tier that can serve it. The best tier is not monotone in demand: tiny threads ride high, medium threads wake a low tier, heavy threads go high again. Two common designs err on opposite sides of the rule: grouping a light thread with the heavy threads of its application overpays above the threshold, and an energy model without idle costs overpays below it. In a model with five tiers, grouping costs 80 to 145\% more energy than the rule, and more as tiers are added. Measurements on an Apple M6 anchor the parameters.

cs.PF↗