↓ Skip to main content

The Matthews correlation coefficient (MCC) is more reliable than balanced accuracy, bookmaker informedness, and markedness in two-class confusion matrix evaluation

Overview of attention for article published in BioData Mining, February 2021
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 tweeters
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
92 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Matthews correlation coefficient (MCC) is more reliable than balanced accuracy, bookmaker informedness, and markedness in two-class confusion matrix evaluation
Published in
BioData Mining, February 2021
DOI 10.1186/s13040-021-00244-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Davide Chicco, Niklas Tötsch, Giuseppe Jurman

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 92 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 92 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 13%
Researcher 11 12%
Student > Bachelor 8 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 9%
Other 11 12%
Unknown 28 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 21 23%
Engineering 12 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 4%
Other 14 15%
Unknown 31 34%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 November 2021.
All research outputs
#3,059,554
of 19,508,584 outputs
Outputs from BioData Mining
#81
of 285 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#79,716
of 389,375 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BioData Mining
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,508,584 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 285 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 389,375 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them