arXiv:2605.14147cs.LG2026-05

对比五种不平衡处理方法,发现复杂模型在图像文本数据上效果更好

A Systematic Evaluation of Imbalance Handling Methods in Biomedical Binary Classification

  • 测试了五种不平衡处理方法在不同模型和数据上的表现
  • 随机过采样和重加权显著提升复杂模型性能,而SMOTE与欠采样会降低效果
  • 适合用在深度学习模型处理医学图像和文本数据的场景

本研究系统评估了五种常用不平衡处理方法(RUS、ROS、SMOTE、RW、DMO)在生物医学二分类任务中的表现,对比原始训练(RAW)基线。实验涵盖三类公开数据集:MIMIC-III(表格)、ADE-Corpus-V2(文本)、MURA(图像),覆盖常见生物医学数据模态。使用从逻辑回归到深度神经网络(MLP、BiLSTM、BERT、DenseNet、DINOv2)等多种模型评估不同复杂度的影响。结果显示:简单模型如逻辑回归在表格数据上,IHMs无显著优势;而对复杂模型和非结构化数据,ROS与RW能持续提升性能;直接优化F1得分仅在文本与图像数据中有效;相反,RUS与SMOTE始终降低性能,不推荐使用。结论表明,不平衡处理方法的效果取决于模型复杂度与数据模态,合理选择可显著提升高复杂度模型在多模态数据上的表现。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

Objective: The primary goal of this study was to systematically examine the impact of commonly used imbalance handling methods (IHMs) on predictive performance in biomedical binary classification, considering the interplay between model complexity and diverse data modalities. Material and Methods: We evaluated five representative IHMs: random undersampling (RUS), random oversampling (ROS), SMOTE, re-weighting (RW), and direct F1-score optimization (DMO), against a raw training (RAW) baseline. The evaluation encompassed three public biomedical datasets: MIMIC-III (tabular), ADE-Corpus-V2 (text), and MURA (image), spanning three common biomedical data modalities. To assess varying model complexity, we employed a range of architectures, from classical logistic regression and random forest to deep neural networks, including multilayer perceptron (MLP), BiLSTM, BERT, DenseNet, and DINOv2. Results: For simpler models such as logistic regression on tabular data, IHMs yielded no significant advantage over the RAW baseline, aligning with prior findings. However, clear benefits were observed for more complex models and unstructured data: (a) ROS and RW consistently enhanced the performance of powerful models; (b) direct F1-score optimization demonstrated utility primarily for unstructured text and image data; and (c) RUS and SMOTE consistently degraded performance and are therefore not recommended. Conclusion: The effectiveness of IHMs depends on both model complexity and data modality. Performance gains are most pronounced when leveraging appropriate IHMs, such as ROS, RW, and DMO, on high-complexity models.

不平衡处理生物医学分类模型深度学习

Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。