Confusion Matrix is one of the core foundations of evaluating AI model performance. Accuracy is the simplest metric built on top of it.Confusion Matrix is one of the core foundations of evaluating AI model performance. Accuracy is the simplest metric built on top of it.

Confusion Matrix Explained: The Real Foundation of Model Evaluation

2025/11/06 13:55
4 min read
For feedback or concerns regarding this content, please contact us at [email protected]

Confusion Matrix is one of the core foundations of evaluating AI model performance, and Accuracy is the simplest metric built on top of it. Today we’ll break down what these terms mean and how they are calculated.

Why do we even need metrics in AI models? Most often, they are used to compare models with each other while separating the evaluation from business metrics. If you look only at business outcomes (like customer NPS or revenue), you might completely misinterpret what actually caused the change.

For example, you release a new version of your model, and it performs better (its model metrics improved), but at the same time the economy crashes and people stop buying your product (your revenue drops). If you didn’t measure model metrics separately, you could easily assume that the new version harmed your business — even though the real reason was an external factor. This is a simple example, but it clearly shows why model metrics and business metrics must be considered independently.

Before we continue, it’s important to understand that model metrics differ depending on the type of task:

  1. Classification — when you predict which category an observation belongs to. For example, you see an image and must decide what’s on it. The answer could be one of several classes: a dog, a cat, or a mouse. A special case of classification is binary classification — when the answer is only 0 or 1. For instance: “Is this a cat or not a cat?”
  2. Regression — when you predict a numerical value based on past data. \n For example, yesterday Bitcoin cost $32,000, and you forecast it to be $34,533 tomorrow. In other words, you are predicting a number.

Since these tasks are different, the metrics used to evaluate them are also different. In this post, we’ll focus specifically on classification.

Confusion Matrix

First, let’s look at the table below. It’s called the confusion matrix. Imagine our model predicts whether someone will buy an elephant. Then we actually try to sell elephants to people — and in reality, some do buy, and some don’t.

So, the results of such an evaluation can be divided into four groups:

  • The model predicted that a person would buy the car — and he actually bought it → True Positive (TP)
  • The model predicted that a person would not buy the car, but he ended up buying it anyway → False Negative (FN)
  • The model predicted that a person would buy the elephant, but when offered, they did not → False Positive (FP)
  • The model predicted that a person would not buy the elephant — and indeed, they didn’t → True Negative (TN)

This is the foundation for many other metrics.

Accuracy

Now let’s look at the simplest and most basic performance metric — the one clients usually mention when they don’t really understand machine learning. This metric is called accuracy.

Looking at the confusion matrix above, accuracy is calculated as:

Accuracy = (TP + TN) / (TP + TN + FP + FN)

Accuracy is rarely sufficient on its own, because it can give a misleading impression of model quality when the dataset is imbalanced.

For example, imagine we have:

100 images of cats 10 images of dogs

Let’s simplify: cats → 0, dogs → 1 (so this is binary classification). Clearly, cats appear ten times more often — meaning the dataset is not balanced.

Suppose our model correctly classified:

90 cats correctly → TN = 90 10 cats incorrectly → FN = 10 5 dogs correctly → TP = 5 5 dogs incorrectly → FP = 5

Plugging into the formula:

Accuracy = (5 + 90) / (5 + 90 + 5 + 10) Accuracy = 95 / 110 ≈ 86.4%

Seems like a solid result! 86% of the predictions are correct!

But notice something important: if we had simply predicted “every image is a cat”, our accuracy would be 90% — without having any model at all.

So, even though our model seems to achieve a decent accuracy (~86%), it is actually performing poorly.

Conclusion

In the next article, I’ll go deeper into the more practical metrics: Precision, Recall, F-score, ROC-AUC. After that, we’ll cover regression metrics such as MSE, RMSE, MAE, R², MAPE, SMAPE.

Follow me — check my profile for links!

Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact [email protected] for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

And the Big Day Has Arrived: The Anticipated News for XRP and Dogecoin Tomorrow

And the Big Day Has Arrived: The Anticipated News for XRP and Dogecoin Tomorrow

The first-ever ETFs for XRP and Dogecoin are expected to launch in the US tomorrow. Here's what you need to know. Continue Reading: And the Big Day Has Arrived: The Anticipated News for XRP and Dogecoin Tomorrow
Share
Coinstats2025/09/18 04:33
Swiss Franc Intervention: Critical Analysis of SNB’s 2025 Policy and Safe-Haven Resilience

Swiss Franc Intervention: Critical Analysis of SNB’s 2025 Policy and Safe-Haven Resilience

BitcoinWorld Swiss Franc Intervention: Critical Analysis of SNB’s 2025 Policy and Safe-Haven Resilience ZURICH, March 2025 – The Swiss National Bank faces mounting
Share
bitcoinworld2026/03/16 23:10
Cashing In On University Patents Means Giving Up On Our Innovation Future

Cashing In On University Patents Means Giving Up On Our Innovation Future

The post Cashing In On University Patents Means Giving Up On Our Innovation Future appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. “It’s a raid on American innovation that would deliver pennies to the Treasury while kneecapping the very engine of our economic and medical progress,” writes Pipes. Getty Images Washington is addicted to taxing success. Now, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick is floating a plan to skim half the patent earnings from inventions developed at universities with federal funding. It’s being sold as a way to shore up programs like Social Security. In reality, it’s a raid on American innovation that would deliver pennies to the Treasury while kneecapping the very engine of our economic and medical progress. Yes, taxpayer dollars support early-stage research. But the real payoff comes later—in the jobs created, cures discovered, and industries launched when universities and private industry turn those discoveries into real products. By comparison, the sums at stake in patent licensing are trivial. Universities collectively earn only about $3.6 billion annually in patent income—less than the federal government spends on Social Security in a single day. Even confiscating half would barely register against a $6 trillion federal budget. And yet the damage from such a policy would be anything but trivial. The true return on taxpayer investment isn’t in licensing checks sent to Washington, but in the downstream economic activity that federally supported research unleashes. Thanks to the bipartisan Bayh-Dole Act of 1980, universities and private industry have powerful incentives to translate early-stage discoveries into real-world products. Before Bayh-Dole, the government hoarded patents from federally funded research, and fewer than 5% were ever licensed. Once universities could own and license their own inventions, innovation exploded. The result has been one of the best returns on investment in government history. Since 1996, university research has added nearly $2 trillion to U.S. industrial output, supported 6.5 million jobs, and launched more than 19,000 startups. Those companies pay…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 03:26