Micro AUC
In single-label problems the pooled positive rate is 1/K, providing a no-skill reference for micro average precision rather than a guaranteed floor.
In single-label problems the pooled positive rate is 1/K, providing a no-skill reference for micro average precision rather than a guaranteed floor.
Three classes with similar ROC-AUC score 0.96, 0.59 and 0.23 on average precision. Prevalence changes how these metrics should be read.
Three different numbers go by the name PR-AUC. Which one average_precision_score returns, and why the difference is not cosmetic.
The ranking view and the area view give the same value. Where the term is ambiguous, how ties are counted, and what AP is not.
The same model scores 0.79 or 0.04 depending only on how many negatives are in the test set. Why that is informative rather than a flaw.
Rare outcomes raise distinct questions about fitting, decision thresholds, and evaluation; resampling is one possible training intervention.
Ranking, probability, and decision are three separate things to evaluate.