Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Benchmarking Deep AUROC Optimization: Loss Functions and Algorithmic Choices

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2203.14177 v3 pith:JOIIHQCN submitted 2022-03-27 cs.LG cs.AI

classification cs.LGcs.AI
keywords lossaurocdeepfunctionspairwisealgorithmicbenchmarkchoices
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
abstract

The area under the ROC curve (AUROC) has been vigorously applied for imbalanced classification and moreover combined with deep learning techniques. However, there is no existing work that provides sound information for peers to choose appropriate deep AUROC maximization techniques. In this work, we fill this gap from three aspects. (i) We benchmark a variety of loss functions with different algorithmic choices for deep AUROC optimization problem. We study the loss functions in two categories: pairwise loss and composite loss, which includes a total of 10 loss functions. Interestingly, we find composite loss, as an innovative loss function class, shows more competitive performance than pairwise loss from both training convergence and testing generalization perspectives. Nevertheless, data with more corrupted labels favors a pairwise symmetric loss. (ii) Moreover, we benchmark and highlight the essential algorithmic choices such as positive sampling rate, regularization, normalization/activation, and optimizers. Key findings include: higher positive sampling rate is likely to be beneficial for deep AUROC maximization; different datasets favors different weights of regularizations; appropriate normalization techniques, such as sigmoid and $\ell_2$ score normalization, could improve model performance. (iii) For optimization aspect, we benchmark SGD-type, Momentum-type, and Adam-type optimizers for both pairwise and composite loss. Our findings show that although Adam-type method is more competitive from training perspective, but it does not outperform others from testing perspective.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. SincQDR-VAD: A Noise-Robust Voice Activity Detection Framework Leveraging Learnable Filters and Ranking-Aware Optimization

    cs.SD 2025-08 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A lightweight VAD model with a learnable sinc filterbank and a squared-margin ranking loss reports higher AUROC and F2 scores on AVA-Speech and ACAM using only 8.0k parameters.

Pith tools