Stop Chasing the C-index: This Is How We Should Evaluate Our Survival Models
원문 초록
We argue that many survival analysis and time-to-event models are incorrectly evaluated. First, we survey many examples of evaluation approaches in the literature and find that most rely on concordance (C-index). However, the C-index only measures a model's discriminative ability and does not assess other important aspects, such as the accuracy of the time-to-event predictions or the calibration of the model's probabilistic estimates. Next, we present a set of key desiderata for choosing the right evaluation metric and discuss their pros and cons. These are tailored to the challenges in survival analysis, such as sensitivity to miscalibration and various censoring assumptions. We hypothesize that the current development of survival metrics conforms to a double-helix ladder, and that model validity and metric validity must stand on the same rung of the assumption ladder. Finally, we discuss the appropriate methods for evaluating a survival model in practice and summarize various viewpoints opposing our analysis.
함께 살펴볼 논문
공통 태그를 근거로 연결했습니다. 실제 인용 관계나 논문의 우수성을 뜻하지 않습니다.
Survival Analysis as Imprecise Classification with Trainable Kernels
SurvUnc: A Meta-Model Based Uncertainty Quantification Framework for Survival Analysis
Multimodal Cancer Survival Analysis via Hypergraph Learning with Cross-Modality Rebalance
Multi-Resolution Pathology-Language Pre-training Model with Text-Guided Visual Representation
Beyond Cox Models: Assessing the Performance of Machine-Learning Methods in Non-Proportional Hazards and Non-Linear Survival Analysis
Offline Dynamic Inventory and Pricing Strategy: Addressing Censored and Dependent Demand
토론
이 논문과 연결된 포럼 글이 아직 없습니다.