Evaluation of a decided sample size in machine learning applications

Оценка определённого размера выборки в приложениях машинного обучения
Daniyal Rajput, Wei-Jen Wang, Chun‐Chuan Chen
2023-02-14

classification accuracyeffect sizemachine learningsample size determinationtenfold cross-validation
BACKGROUND: An appropriate sample size is essential for obtaining a precise and reliable outcome of a study. In machine learning (ML), studies with inadequate samples suffer from overfitting of data and have a lower probability of producing true effects, while the increment in sample size increases the accuracy of prediction but may not cause a significant change after a certain sample size. Existing statistical approaches using standardized mean difference, effect size, and statistical power for determining sample size are potentially biased due to miscalculations or lack of experimental details. This study aims to design criteria for evaluating sample size in ML studies. We examined the average and grand effect sizes and the performance of five ML methods using simulated datasets and three real datasets to derive the criteria for sample size. We systematically increase the sample size, starting from 16, by randomly sampling and examine the impact of sample size on classifiers' performance and both effect sizes. Tenfold cross-validation was used to quantify the accuracy. RESULTS: The results demonstrate that the effect sizes and the classification accuracies increase while the variances in effect sizes shrink with the increment of samples when the datasets have a good discriminative power between two classes. By contrast, indeterminate datasets had poor effect sizes and classification accuracies, which did not improve by increasing sample size in both simulated and real datasets. A good dataset exhibited a significant difference in average and grand effect sizes. We derived two criteria based on the above findings to assess a decided sample size by combining the effect size and the ML accuracy. The sample size is considered suitable when it has appropriate effect sizes (≥ 0.5) and ML accuracy (≥ 80%). After an appropriate sample size, the increment in samples will not benefit as it will not significantly change the effect size and accuracy, thereby resulting in a good cost-benefit ratio. CONCLUSION: We believe that these practical criteria can be used as a reference for both the authors and editors to evaluate whether the selected sample size is adequate for a study.
1
A suitable sample size is defined by combining effect size and ML performance, requiring effect sizes of at least 0.5 and accuracy of at least 80%.
2
Beyond an appropriate sample size, additional observations provide no significant improvement in effect size or classification accuracy.
3
For indeterminate datasets, effect sizes and classification accuracy remain poor and do not improve with increasing sample size.
4
The study develops criteria for evaluating sample adequacy in machine-learning applications using effect sizes and classification accuracy.
5
With datasets that discriminate well between classes, increasing sample size raises effect sizes and classification accuracy while reducing effect-size variance.

Sample size in machine learning studies, evaluated using simulated and real datasets with binary classification tasks

The relationship between sample size, effect sizes, and machine-learning classification accuracy, including criteria for determining an appropriate sample size

Publication Details
Publication Date
2023-02-14
Journal
Publisher
ISSN
Cited by
406
Access Type
Author Information
Authors
Daniyal Rajput
Wei-Jen Wang
Chun‐Chuan Chen
Explore further
Open the scid.ai AI chat with a ready-made request: it will find papers on a similar topic and help build a literature review.
Find similar papers in the chat
Make a presentation
100%