📄 Need a professional CV? Try our Resume Builder! Get Started

Handling Imbalanced Data: Don't Let Your Model Be Biased!

Learn Over-sampling and Under-sampling techniques to build fairer ML models.

Dealing with Imbalanced Data: Building Fairer Models

Imagine you're building a model to detect a rare disease. Most people in your data are healthy (Class 0), and only a tiny fraction have the disease (Class 1). If you train a model on this data directly, it might become very good at predicting "healthy" simply because that's the most common case. It might achieve high accuracy but completely fail at identifying the rare, important cases!

This is the problem of imbalanced data, which is very common in real-world scenarios like fraud detection, medical diagnosis, and anomaly detection. When one class (the majority class) vastly outnumbers another (the minority class), standard models often become biased towards the majority.

Main Technical Concept: Imbalanced data refers to classification datasets where the classes are not represented equally. Standard machine learning algorithms trained on such data tend to be biased towards the majority class, leading to poor performance on the minority class. Techniques like Under-sampling and Over-sampling are used to balance the class distribution before training.

How to Spot Imbalance

Before applying any techniques, you first need to check if your data *is* actually imbalanced. Here's how:

  • Value Counts: Use pandas to count the occurrences of each class in your target variable (y). A large difference indicates imbalance.
  • Visualization: Use a library like Seaborn to create a count plot of your target variable. A visual inspection makes the imbalance obvious.
Python code to check class distribution:
import pandas as pd
import seaborn as sns
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
from collections import Counter # Useful for counting

# --- Assume df is your loaded DataFrame ---
# --- Assume 'Class' is the name of your target variable column ---
# y = df['Class'].values # Or get y as shown previously

# 1. Using Value Counts
print("Class Distribution (Value Counts):")
target_counts = pd.Series(y).value_counts() # Convert y to Series if it's a NumPy array
print(target_counts)

# 2. Using Counter
print("\nClass Distribution (Counter):")
print(Counter(y))

# 3. Visualization
plt.figure(figsize=(6, 4))
sns.countplot(x=y)
plt.title('Class Distribution Before Balancing')
plt.xlabel('Class (0: Majority, 1: Minority)')
plt.ylabel('Count')
# plt.show() # Uncomment to display
                                    

If you see one bar vastly taller than the other(s), you have an imbalanced dataset!

Strategies to Balance Your Data

There are two main approaches to fix class imbalance *before* training your model:

  1. Under-sampling: Reduce the number of samples from the majority class to match the number of samples in the minority class.
  2. Over-sampling: Increase the number of samples in the minority class to match the number of samples in the majority class.

The `imbalanced-learn` (imblearn) library in Python provides excellent tools for both.

Under-Sampling: Removing Majority Samples

The Concept

Under-sampling techniques work by removing instances from the majority class. The goal is to make the dataset smaller but balanced.

Example Technique: NearMiss

NearMiss is one under-sampling algorithm. It selects majority class samples that are "close" to minority class samples, based on distance calculations. There are different versions of NearMiss controlling exactly how "closeness" is defined.

Python code using `NearMiss` from `imblearn`:
from imblearn.under_sampling import NearMiss
from collections import Counter
# --- Assume X and y are your original features and target ---

print(f"Original dataset shape: {Counter(y)}")

# Initialize NearMiss (version 3 is common)
nm = NearMiss() # You can explore different versions

# Resample the dataset
X_resampled_under, y_resampled_under = nm.fit_resample(X, y)

print(f"Resampled dataset shape (Under-sampling): {Counter(y_resampled_under)}")
print(f"New feature matrix shape: {X_resampled_under.shape}")
                                    

Pros and Cons of Under-sampling

  • 🟢 **Pro:** Can significantly reduce dataset size, potentially speeding up training.
  • 🔴 **Con:** Risk of losing important information contained in the removed majority class samples. This is often a major drawback, especially if the dataset isn't huge to begin with.

Under-sampling is generally considered only when the majority class is extremely large and you can afford to discard data.

Over-Sampling: Increasing Minority Samples

Over-sampling techniques work by adding more copies or variations of the minority class instances.

1. Random Over-Sampling

  • The Concept: The simplest method. It randomly duplicates existing samples from the minority class until it matches the size of the majority class.
Python code using `RandomOverSampler`:
from imblearn.over_sampling import RandomOverSampler
from collections import Counter
# --- Assume X and y are your original features and target ---

print(f"Original dataset shape: {Counter(y)}")

ros = RandomOverSampler(random_state=42) # random_state for reproducibility
X_resampled_ro, y_resampled_ro = ros.fit_resample(X, y)

print(f"Resampled dataset shape (Random Over-sampling): {Counter(y_resampled_ro)}")
print(f"New feature matrix shape: {X_resampled_ro.shape}")
                                    
  • 🟢 **Pro:** Simple, doesn't lose information.
  • 🔴 **Con:** Can lead to overfitting because the model sees exact copies of the same minority instances multiple times.

2. SMOTE (Synthetic Minority Over-sampling TEchnique)

  • The Concept: A more advanced technique that creates new, synthetic minority class samples instead of just copying existing ones.
  • How it Works (Simplified): For a minority sample, it finds its nearest neighbors (in the feature space) that are also minority samples. It then creates a new synthetic sample somewhere along the line segment connecting the original sample and one of its chosen neighbors.
Python code using `SMOTE`:
from imblearn.over_sampling import SMOTE
from collections import Counter
# --- Assume X and y are your original features and target ---

print(f"Original dataset shape: {Counter(y)}")

smote = SMOTE(random_state=42)
X_resampled_smote, y_resampled_smote = smote.fit_resample(X, y)

print(f"Resampled dataset shape (SMOTE): {Counter(y_resampled_smote)}")
print(f"New feature matrix shape: {X_resampled_smote.shape}")
                                    
  • 🟢 **Pro:** Avoids simple duplication, often leads to better generalization than Random Over-Sampling. Widely used and often effective.
  • 🔴 **Con:** Can sometimes create noisy samples if minority class instances are very close to majority class instances. Might blur the decision boundary. Dimensionality can affect neighbor finding.

Recommendation: Over-sampling (especially SMOTE or its variations) is often preferred over under-sampling as it doesn't discard potentially useful data.

The GOLDEN RULE of Resampling!

🚨 Always perform resampling techniques (Under-sampling or Over-sampling) ONLY on the TRAINING dataset *AFTER* splitting your data! 🚨

Why is this SO important?

If you resample the *entire* dataset before splitting into training and testing sets, you introduce data leakage.

  • With Over-sampling: Copies or synthetic versions of minority samples might end up in *both* your training and testing sets. Your model will then be tested on data that is essentially identical or very similar to what it was trained on, giving you an artificially inflated (and misleadingly high) performance score on the test set.
  • With Under-sampling: Information from the test set (implicitly, by considering its distribution when deciding which majority samples to remove from the whole dataset) influences the training set.

Your test set must always represent truly *unseen* data to get an honest evaluation of how your model will perform in the real world.

Correct Workflow:

  1. Load original data (X, y).
  2. Split into Training (X_train, y_train) and Testing (X_test, y_test).
  3. Apply resampling technique (e.g., SMOTE) only to `X_train` and `y_train` -> Get `X_train_resampled`, `y_train_resampled`.
  4. Train your model on the `X_train_resampled`, `y_train_resampled` data.
  5. Evaluate your model on the original, untouched `X_test`, `y_test` data.

Common Issues & Solutions Summary

Issue Solution / Approach Prevention / Best Practice
Loss of important data with under-sampling Prefer Over-sampling (SMOTE, RandomOverSampler) if data loss is a concern. Use under-sampling cautiously, primarily when the majority class is vast and data is abundant.
Overfitting with Random Over-sampling Use SMOTE or other synthetic methods (ADASYN, BorderlineSMOTE). Monitor performance carefully. Always cross-validate after resampling. Tune model hyperparameters (e.g., regularization).
SMOTE creates unrealistic/noisy synthetic points Tune SMOTE parameters (e.g., `k_neighbors`). Try variants like BorderlineSMOTE or ADASYN. Consider feature selection beforehand. Visualize data before/after SMOTE. Ensure features are appropriately scaled.
Model evaluation metrics are misleading (e.g., high accuracy but poor minority class detection) Use metrics appropriate for imbalanced data: Precision, Recall, F1-Score, AUC-ROC, AUC-PR. Don't rely solely on Accuracy for imbalanced problems. Focus on minority class performance.
Data leakage from resampling Resample ONLY the training data after the train-test split. Integrate resampling into a Scikit-learn Pipeline *after* the split step.

Tips for Success

💡Best Practices

  • Resample Training Data Only: Cannot stress this enough! Avoid data leakage.
  • Choose Appropriate Metrics: Don't just use accuracy. Look at Precision, Recall, F1-Score (especially for the minority class), ROC AUC, or Precision-Recall AUC.
  • Try Different Strategies: No single resampling method is always best. Experiment with under-sampling, random over-sampling, SMOTE, and possibly combinations or more advanced techniques. Compare their impact on model performance using cross-validation.
  • Combine with Other Techniques: Resampling can be used alongside other methods for handling imbalance, like using algorithms that are inherently better with imbalanced data (e.g., some tree-based methods with class weights) or adjusting class weights during model training (`class_weight='balanced'` in many scikit-learn models).
  • Consider Cost-Sensitive Learning: If misclassifying the minority class is much more costly, explore cost-sensitive learning algorithms that directly incorporate these costs.

Handling Imbalanced Data: Key Takeaways

  • Imbalanced data (unequal class distribution) can bias standard ML models towards the majority class.
  • Check for imbalance using value_counts() or visualizations like countplot.
  • Two main resampling approaches:
    • Under-sampling (e.g., NearMiss): Reduces majority class (Risk: data loss).
    • Over-sampling (e.g., RandomOverSampler, SMOTE): Increases minority class (Risk: overfitting (Random) or noisy samples (SMOTE)).
  • Crucial Rule: Apply resampling techniques ONLY to the training data after splitting.
  • Evaluate performance using metrics suitable for imbalanced data (Precision, Recall, F1, AUC).
  • The imbalanced-learn library provides powerful tools for resampling.

Test Your Knowledge & Interview Prep

Interview Question

Question 1: What is imbalanced data in a classification context, and why is it a problem for machine learning models?

Show Answer

Imbalanced data refers to datasets where the number of instances belonging to one class (majority class) is significantly higher than the number of instances belonging to other classes (minority classes). It's a problem because standard ML algorithms aim to minimize overall error, often leading them to become biased towards predicting the majority class well while performing poorly on predicting the rare but often important minority class.

Question 2: Describe the main difference between under-sampling and over-sampling.

Show Answer

Under-sampling reduces the size of the dataset by removing instances from the majority class to match the minority class count.
Over-sampling increases the size of the dataset by adding copies or synthetic versions of instances from the minority class to match the majority class count.

Interview Question

Question 3: What is SMOTE, and how does it differ from simple Random Over-Sampling?

Show Answer

SMOTE (Synthetic Minority Over-sampling TEchnique) is an over-sampling method. Unlike Random Over-Sampling, which simply duplicates existing minority samples, SMOTE creates new, synthetic minority samples. It does this by selecting a minority sample, finding its nearest minority neighbors, and generating a new sample along the line segment connecting the original sample to one of its neighbors. This often leads to better generalization and less overfitting compared to random duplication.

Question 4: Why is it critically important to perform resampling (like SMOTE or NearMiss) *after* splitting the data into training and testing sets?

Show Answer

Performing resampling before splitting causes data leakage. If you over-sample before splitting, identical or synthetic copies of minority samples can end up in both the training and test sets, making the test set no longer representative of unseen data and leading to overly optimistic performance evaluation. If you under-sample before splitting, the test set distribution is altered based on information (implicitly) from the training set. The test set must remain untouched and representative of the original data distribution to get a valid estimate of the model's real-world performance.

Interview Question

Question 5: If accuracy is high on an imbalanced dataset, why might it be a misleading metric? What other metrics should you consider?

Show Answer

High accuracy can be misleading because a model might achieve it simply by always predicting the majority class. For example, if 99% of data is Class 0, a model predicting Class 0 every time gets 99% accuracy but is useless for identifying Class 1. Better metrics to consider include:
- Precision: Of the instances predicted as positive, how many actually were? (TP / (TP + FP))
- Recall (Sensitivity): Of all the actual positive instances, how many did the model correctly identify? (TP / (TP + FN))
- F1-Score: The harmonic mean of Precision and Recall (good balance between them).
- AUC-ROC: Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve (measures ability to distinguish between classes).
- AUC-PR: Area Under the Precision-Recall Curve (often more informative than ROC AUC for highly imbalanced data).