Skip to main content
added 11 characters in body
Source Link
Peter O.
  • 1.2k
  • 1
  • 9
  • 18

I just want to note the following paper, published this year, that proposes "a simple transformation of the F-measure, which we[the authors] call $F^*$ (F-star), which has an immediate practical interpretation." It even cited this very discussion on Cross Validated.

Specifically, $F^* = F/(2-F)$ "is the proportion of the relevant classifications which are correct, where a relevant classification is one which is either really class 1 or classified as class 1".

REFERENCES:

I just want to note the following paper, published this year, that proposes "a simple transformation of the F-measure, which we call $F^*$ (F-star), which has an immediate practical interpretation." It even cited this very discussion on Cross Validated.

Specifically, $F^* = F/(2-F)$ "is the proportion of the relevant classifications which are correct, where a relevant classification is one which is either really class 1 or classified as class 1".

REFERENCES:

I just want to note the following paper, published this year, that proposes "a simple transformation of the F-measure, which [the authors] call $F^*$ (F-star), which has an immediate practical interpretation." It even cited this very discussion on Cross Validated.

Specifically, $F^* = F/(2-F)$ "is the proportion of the relevant classifications which are correct, where a relevant classification is one which is either really class 1 or classified as class 1".

REFERENCES:

Source Link
Peter O.
  • 1.2k
  • 1
  • 9
  • 18

I just want to note the following paper, published this year, that proposes "a simple transformation of the F-measure, which we call $F^*$ (F-star), which has an immediate practical interpretation." It even cited this very discussion on Cross Validated.

Specifically, $F^* = F/(2-F)$ "is the proportion of the relevant classifications which are correct, where a relevant classification is one which is either really class 1 or classified as class 1".

REFERENCES: