Sign Up Now!

Sign up and get personalized intelligence briefing delivered daily.


Sign Up

Articles related to "results"


NASA Asteroid Classification

  • The train set(generated as per my code) contains 3749 data instances and has 610 instances labeled as 1(hazardous), which means that if a model predicts all values as 0, then the accuracy will be 83.72%.
  • Moreover, if we look at Specificity, Mathews Correlation Coefficient and False Positive Rate for the test set then these are ‘nan’, meaning the model is broken and has predicted all values as 0(not hazardous).
  • The results table for SVC is quite similar to that of Naive Bayes and hence it clearly shows that SVC has also failed(as Specificity, Mathews Correlation Coefficient and False Positive Rate are again ‘nan’).Let us look at the confusion matrix of SVC.
  • The accuracy is 99.4% for test set which is great and also the values of Mathews correlation coefficient and F1 Score are almost touching 1 which denotes that the model is almost perfect.

save | comments | report | share on


NASA Asteroid Classification

  • The train set(generated as per my code) contains 3749 data instances and has 610 instances labeled as 1(hazardous), which means that if a model predicts all values as 0, then the accuracy will be 83.72%.
  • Moreover, if we look at Specificity, Mathews Correlation Coefficient and False Positive Rate for the test set then these are ‘nan’, meaning the model is broken and has predicted all values as 0(not hazardous).
  • The results table for SVC is quite similar to that of Naive Bayes and hence it clearly shows that SVC has also failed(as Specificity, Mathews Correlation Coefficient and False Positive Rate are again ‘nan’).Let us look at the confusion matrix of SVC.
  • The accuracy is 99.4% for test set which is great and also the values of Mathews correlation coefficient and F1 Score are almost touching 1 which denotes that the model is almost perfect.

save | comments | report | share on