↓ 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 (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 tweeters
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
78 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 8 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 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 78 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 13%
Researcher 8 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 9%
Student > Bachelor 7 9%
Other 10 13%
Unknown 23 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 18 23%
Engineering 10 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 6%
Chemistry 3 4%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 26 33%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 01 March 2021.
All research outputs
#3,579,577
of 18,758,139 outputs
Outputs from BioData Mining
#99
of 283 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#93,824
of 362,373 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BioData Mining
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,758,139 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 283 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 362,373 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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