vladimirbesk commited on
Commit
f90d279
·
verified ·
1 Parent(s): b41ef19

card: state the held-out calibration error, the shipped 0.0054 is in-sample

Browse files
Files changed (1) hide show
  1. README.md +11 -3
README.md CHANGED
@@ -42,15 +42,23 @@ category, not a claim of compatibility or endorsement.
42
 
43
  ## Results (development)
44
 
45
- Measured on the held-out development split (17,501 items). Calibration is the
46
- point of this model, and the expected calibration error is low.
 
47
 
48
  | Metric | Value |
49
  | --- | --- |
50
- | ECE (calibration error) | 0.0054 |
 
51
  | Temperature | 1.82 |
52
  | Overall accuracy (micro) | 0.824 |
53
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
54
  Per task:
55
 
56
  | Task | Accuracy | n |
 
42
 
43
  ## Results (development)
44
 
45
+ Measured on the development split (17,501 items), which is held out from
46
+ training. Calibration is the point of this model, and the expected calibration
47
+ error is low.
48
 
49
  | Metric | Value |
50
  | --- | --- |
51
+ | ECE, temperature fitted on this split | 0.0054 |
52
+ | ECE, temperature fitted on a disjoint half | 0.0089 |
53
  | Temperature | 1.82 |
54
  | Overall accuracy (micro) | 0.824 |
55
 
56
+ Two ECE figures, because the number depends on where the temperature came from.
57
+ The shipped temperature was fitted on this same split, so 0.0054 is an in-sample
58
+ figure and optimistic. Fitting the temperature on one half and measuring on the
59
+ other gives 0.0089, which is what to expect on new data of the same kind. Both
60
+ are reproducible from the code repository; the second is the one to quote.
61
+
62
  Per task:
63
 
64
  | Task | Accuracy | n |