Confusion Matrix
A confusion matrix counts how predicted classes differ from true classes. It is the base table behind many classification metrics.
For binary classification:
| Predicted positive | Predicted negative | |
|---|---|---|
| True positive class | TP | FN |
| True negative class | FP | TN |
The total number of evaluated examples is:
Derived Quantities
True positive rate, or recall:
False positive rate:
Positive predictive value, or precision:
True negative rate, or specificity:
False negative rate:
Accuracy:
Balanced accuracy:
Balanced accuracy is often more informative than raw accuracy under class imbalance.
Why It Matters
Aggregate metrics hide which error type dominates. In imbalanced problems, a model can have high accuracy while missing most positives or producing too many false positives.
Threshold and Prevalence
The confusion matrix is defined after a decision rule. For a score :
Changing changes TP, FP, TN, and FN. A test-set confusion matrix should use a threshold chosen from validation data or a fixed application rule.
Prevalence changes how errors feel operationally. With rare positives, even a low FPR can produce many false positives:
where is the positive prevalence and is the evaluation size.
Multi-Class Form
For classes, the confusion matrix is:
Rows often represent true classes and columns predicted classes. State the convention because transposed matrices invert the reading of common errors.
Checks
- Which class is treated as positive?
- Are classes imbalanced?
- Is the threshold fixed before test evaluation?
- Are false positives and false negatives equally costly?
- Should metrics be reported per class, macro-averaged, or micro-averaged?
- Does the paper show the confusion matrix or only a single derived metric?