On Asymptotic Distributions and Confidence Intervals for LIFT Measures in Data Mining
数据挖掘 LIFT 指标的渐近分布与置信区间AI 解读 ↓
本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。
DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。
引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。
关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要研究通用评分规则的评价区间,未涉及宏观预测或金融收益预测。
数据挖掘 LIFT 指标的渐近分布与置信区间AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
A LIFT measure, such as the response rate, lift, or the percentage of captured response, is a fundamental measure of effectiveness for a scoring rule obtained from data mining, which is estimated from a set of validation data. In this article, we study how to construct confidence intervals of the LIFT measures. We point out the subtlety of this task and explain how simple binomial confidence intervals can have incorrect coverage probabilities, due to omitting variation from the sample percentile of the scoring rule. We derive the asymptotic distribution using some advanced empirical process theory and the functional delta method in the Appendix. The additional variation is shown to be related to a conditional mean response, which can be estimated by a local averaging of the responses over the scores from the validation data. Alternatively, a subsampling method is shown to provide a valid confidence interval, without needing to estimate the conditional mean response. Numerical experiments are conducted to compare these different methods regarding the coverage probabilities and the lengths of the resulting confidence intervals.