Guide-linked quiz · Medium Level
Matthews Correlation Coefficient Quiz
Test confusion-matrix reasoning, MCC calculations and class-imbalance pitfalls with examples of spam filters and defect detection.
Question 1 of 8
A filter labels all 1,000 messages legitimate when 990 truly are legitimate. Why is its 99% accuracy insufficient evidence of useful spam detection?
Preview every question8 questions
Answers and explanations appear as you take the quiz.
- A filter labels all 1,000 messages legitimate when 990 truly are legitimate. Why is its 99% accuracy insufficient evidence of useful spam detection?
- Every majority-class error receives more weight than a spam error
- Accuracy alone establishes that both classes have high recall
- The filter has detected none of the ten spam messages
- An MCC of 0.99 follows directly from this accuracy
- Which value results from the guide's toy confusion matrix with 40 true positives, 40 true negatives and 10 of each error?
- MCC of 0.6
- MCC of 0.8
- MCC of 0.4
- MCC of 1.0
- A report interprets an MCC of 0.6 as '60% of cases were correct.' How should that interpretation be corrected?
- It means 60% of positive cases were found
- It means 60% of predicted positives were correct
- It means the model is calibrated at 60% confidence
- MCC is a correlation measure, not the percentage classified correctly
- For binary data containing both classes, a classifier reverses every label perfectly. Which MCC value describes that relationship?
- 0
- -1
- 0.5
- 1
- A factory values missed defects differently from unnecessary inspections. Which additional evidence is needed alongside MCC?
- A single pooled count of all mistakes, without their types
- Only the accuracy at the current operating threshold
- The error counts and their operational costs
- Only a probability-calibration plot, without error counts
- Which inputs are appropriate for scikit-learn's matthews_corrcoef in the workflow described?
- Observed labels and predicted labels
- Observed labels and unthresholded probability estimates
- Predicted probabilities and their rounded copies
- Training labels and labels from unrelated evaluation cases
- Why does predicting a single class for every case require care when interpreting the binary MCC formula?
- The score must equal the majority-class accuracy
- The absent predicted class can be ignored without affecting the formula
- Perfect recall for the chosen class makes the denominator one
- One denominator factor becomes zero
- When extending an MCC report to three classes, which approach matches the guide?
- Compute three binary MCC values and take their unweighted mean
- Use a multiclass MCC implementation and inspect the confusion matrix
- Merge the two rarest classes before interpreting the original task
- Use overall accuracy as the multiclass definition of MCC
Keep testing yourself
More quizzes picked for your level.