Classifier performance prediction for computer-aided diagnosis using a limited dataset.

In a practical classifier design problem, the true population is generally unknown and the available sample is finite-sized. A common approach is to use a resampling technique to estimate the performance of the classifier that will be trained with the available sample. We conducted a Monte Carlo simulation study to compare the ability of the different resampling techniques in training the classifier and predicting its performance under the constraint of a finite-sized sample. The true population for the two classes was assumed to be multivariate normal distributions with known covariance matrices. Finite sets of sample vectors were drawn from the population. The true performance of the classifier is defined as the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) when the classifier designed with the specific sample is applied to the true population. We investigated methods based on the Fukunaga-Hayes and the leave-one-out techniques, as well as three different types of bootstrap methods, namely, the ordinary, 0.632, and 0.632+ bootstrap. The Fisher's linear discriminant analysis was used as the classifier. The dimensionality of the feature space was varied from 3 to 15. The sample size n2 from the positive class was varied between 25 and 60, while the number of cases from the negative class was either equal to n2 or 3n2. Each experiment was performed with an independent dataset randomly drawn from the true population. Using a total of 1000 experiments for each simulation condition, we compared the bias, the variance, and the root-mean-squared error (RMSE) of the AUC estimated using the different resampling techniques relative to the true AUC (obtained from training on a finite dataset and testing on the population). Our results indicated that, under the study conditions, there can be a large difference in the RMSE obtained using different resampling methods, especially when the feature space dimensionality is relatively large and the sample size is small. Under this type of conditions, the 0.632 and 0.632+ bootstrap methods have the lowest RMSE, indicating that the difference between the estimated and the true performances obtained using the 0.632 and 0.632+ bootstrap will be statistically smaller than those obtained using the other three resampling methods. Of the three bootstrap methods, the 0.632+ bootstrap provides the lowest bias. Although this investigation is performed under some specific conditions, it reveals important trends for the problem of classifier performance prediction under the constraint of a limited dataset.