mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

The Hidden Costs of 99% Accuracy: A Trustworthiness Audit of the Telco Customer Churn Benchmark

arXiv 2610.00118 ↗First posted 9 Sep 2026cs.LGcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Customer churn prediction on the IBM Telco Customer Churn benchmark (n = 7,043) routinely reports test accuracies above 95%, with the most cited published study reporting 99.01%. We audit this benchmark for four trustworthiness failures invisible to the accuracy- and F1-centred reporting that dominates the literature. First, pre-split SMOTE inflates churn-class F1 by 13.1 percentage points across ten classifiers and fifteen seeds (Wilcoxon p < 10^-4 per classifier); the same leaky pipeline ordering paired with class weighting yields no inflation, isolating the effect to SMOTE's geometric construction. We measure the mechanism directly: approximately 36% of synthetic training points are nearest-neighbour interpolations of test-set instances. Second, the TotalCharges field is approximately determined by tenure multiplied by MonthlyCharges (R2 = 0.999); removing it changes accuracy by less than 0.2 percentage points, yet TreeSHAP ranks it ninth in mean absolute attribution - a pattern that materially corrupts SHAP-based interpretation. We propose an R2 > 0.95 pre-modelling diagnostic. Third, in a 15-seed calibration audit, isotonic regression is the strongest default; temperature scaling fails on class-weighted tree ensembles whose predicted-probability distribution is bimodal. Fourth, the cost-optimal decision threshold (under a 50 USD retention offer and 24-month CLV proxy) is approximately 5-10 times lower than the F1-optimal threshold, saving approximately 77,000 USD per 1,000 customers. We replicate F1 and F2 on Iranian Telecom Churn (within domain) and Bank Customer Churn (across domain): F1 generalises; F2 generalises only within telecom. We synthesise these findings into a four-component reporting checklist - pipeline disclosure, redundancy diagnostic, calibration audit, and cost-sensitive thresholds - and release a reproducible implementation.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 4 of its 21 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 9 Sep 2026.

Builds on

4 of 21 references.

References · 4

  1. 2017On Calibration of Modern Neural Networkscited by 4,860
  2. 2019Fooling LIME and SHAP: Adversarial Attacks on Post hoc Explanation Methodscited by 440
  3. 2019Explaining individual predictions when features are dependent: More accurate approximations to Shapley valuescited by 205
  4. 2024Impact of Sampling Techniques and Data Leakage on XGBoost Performance in Credit Card Fraud Detectioncited by 3

Built on by

Not cited yet.