search for: coeffience

...class 1 to class 2 is about 23:77. I did a 5-fold cross validation. The networks were trained twice, one with 'weights=1', one with 'weights=ifelse(species=="class1", 77/33, 1)'(pointed out by Prof. Brian Ripley).All other settings are same. The average Matthew Correlation Coeffience for the one with weights=1 is 0.80, significantly larger than that of the other, 0.74. So, it seems weighting the unbalanced samples does not help performance on evaluations, which is against my initial thoughts. My question would be, does that mean the training data is not unbalanced enough? then...