mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Benchmarking Deep AUROC Optimization: Loss Functions and Algorithmic Choices

arXiv 2203.14177 ↗First posted 27 Mar 2022cs.LG cs.AIcited by 10

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The area under the ROC curve (AUROC) has been vigorously applied for imbalanced classification and moreover combined with deep learning techniques. However, there is no existing work that provides sound information for peers to choose appropriate deep AUROC maximization techniques. In this work, we fill this gap from three aspects. (i) We benchmark a variety of loss functions with different algorithmic choices for deep AUROC optimization problem. We study the loss functions in two categories: pairwise loss and composite loss, which includes a total of 10 loss functions. Interestingly, we find composite loss, as an innovative loss function class, shows more competitive performance than pairwise loss from both training convergence and testing generalization perspectives. Nevertheless, data with more corrupted labels favors a pairwise symmetric loss. (ii) Moreover, we benchmark and highlight the essential algorithmic choices such as positive sampling rate, regularization, normalization/activation, and optimizers. Key findings include: higher positive sampling rate is likely to be beneficial for deep AUROC maximization; different datasets favors different weights of regularizations; appropriate normalization techniques, such as sigmoid and ℓ2 score normalization, could improve model performance. (iii) For optimization aspect, we benchmark SGD-type, Momentum-type, and Adam-type optimizers for both pairwise and composite loss. Our findings show that although Adam-type method is more competitive from training perspective, but it does not outperform others from testing perspective.

Key facts. Cited by 10 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 22 of its 40 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 Mar 2022.

Builds on

22 of 40 references.

References · 22

  1. 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 60,361
  2. 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 52,096
  3. 2014Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimizationcited by 37,240
  4. 2016Densely Connected Convolutional Networkscited by 6,720
  5. 2018How Powerful are Graph Neural Networks?cited by 4,393
  6. 2017Neural Message Passing for Quantum Chemistrycited by 3,487
  7. 2019CheXpert: A Large Chest Radiograph Dataset with Uncertainty Labels and Expert Comparisoncited by 1,423
  8. 2017MoleculeNet: A Benchmark for Molecular Machine Learningcited by 1,051
  9. 2019Learning Imbalanced Datasets with Label-Distribution-Aware Margin Losscited by 989
  10. 2019Strategies for Pre-training Graph Neural Networkscited by 971
  11. 2016Benchmarking Deep Reinforcement Learning for Continuous Controlcited by 371
  12. 2017The Marginal Value of Adaptive Gradient Methods in Machine Learningcited by 250
10 more
  1. 2020A Patient-Centric Dataset of Images and Metadata for Identifying Melanomas Using Clinical Contextcited by 146
  2. 2020Descending through a Crowded Valley - Benchmarking Deep Learning Optimizerscited by 119
  3. 2020Benchmarking Deep Learning Interpretability in Time Series Predictionscited by 102
  4. 2014Stochastic Compositional Gradient Descent: Algorithms for Minimizing Compositions of Expected-Value Functionscited by 95
  5. 2018A Single Time-Scale Stochastic Approximation Method for Nested Stochastic Optimizationcited by 53
  6. 2019On Symmetric Losses for Learning from Corrupted Labelscited by 53
  7. 2020Advanced Graph and Sequence Neural Networks for Molecular Property Prediction and Drug Discoverycited by 46
  8. 2013One-Pass AUC Optimizationcited by 42
  9. 2020Optimal Algorithms for Convex Nested Stochastic Composite Optimizationcited by 20
  10. 2021Momentum Accelerates the Convergence of Stochastic AUPRC Maximizationcited by 14

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2022: 3; 2023: 2; 2024: 1; 2025: 2; 2026: 2.

10 papers.