Robustly interrogating machine learning-based scoring functions: what are they learning?
Guy Durant1, Fergus Boyles1, Kristian Birchall2
1Department of Statistics, University of Oxford, St Giles', Oxford OX1 3LB, United Kingdom.
Motivation:
Machine learning-based scoring functions (MLBSFs) have been found to exhibit inconsistent performance on different benchmarks and be prone to learning dataset bias. For the field to develop MLBSFs that learn a generalizable understanding of physics, a more rigorous understanding of how they perform is required.
Results:
In this work, we compared the performance of a diverse set of popular MLBSFs (RFScore, SIGN, OnionNet-2, Pafnucy, and PointVS) to our proposed baseline models that can only learn dataset biases on a range of benchmarks. We found that these baseline models were competitive in accuracy to these MLBSFs in almost all proposed benchmarks, indicating these models only learn dataset biases. Our tests and provided platform, ToolBoxSF, will enable researchers to robustly interrogate MLBSF performance and determine the effect of dataset biases on their predictions.
Availability And Implementation:
https://github.com/guydurant/toolboxsf.
Related Concept Videos
Quantifying and Rejecting Outliers: The Grubbs Test
Detection of Gross Error: The Q Test
Introduction to z Scores
z scores...
Reliability and Validity
Routh-Hurwitz Criterion II
The first scenario occurs when a singular zero appears in the first column of the Routh table. This situation creates a division by zero issues. To resolve this, a small positive or negative number, denoted as epsilon (∈), is substituted for the zero. The stability analysis proceeds by assuming a sign for ∈. If ∈ is positive, any sign change in the first...
Confidence Coefficient


