Two Statistical Approaches to Justify the Use of the Logistic Function in Binary Logistic Regression

<div>The top figure shows the average F1-score vs. <span class="nowrap"><svg height="12.6721pt" id="M382" style="vertical-align:-3.38377pt" version="1.1" viewbox="-0.0498162 -9.28833 31.7429 12.6721" width="31.7429pt" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,0,0)"><path d="M238 0V26C174 32 166 38 166 104V712C132 700 70 683 18 677V653C81 647 87 645 87 577V104C87 38 78 32 15 26V0H238Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,3.289,0)"><path d="M257 449C165 449 37 374 37 209C37 98 119 -12 256 -12C355 -12 473 65 473 226C473 349 381 449 257 449ZM244 416C333 416 380 320 380 204C380 67 329 21 267 21C184 21 130 115 130 241C130 354 184 416 244 416Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,9.919,0)"><path d="M463 437C426 431 375 425 327 422C297 440 264 449 231 449H230C153 449 51 396 51 283C51 215 94 168 139 149C123 129 91 103 51 88C50 78 53 60 62 46C75 25 100 2 136 -9C112 -28 73 -59 53 -79C38 -94 29 -113 29 -135C30 -192 91 -257 203 -257C336 -257 452 -160 452 -59C452 39 371 59 309 59C275 59 240 58 203 58C158 58 140 77 140 96C140 110 157 129 170 138C186 135 205 133 221 133C306 133 396 185 396 293C396 328 384 360 366 381L423 378C439 387 459 413 468 429L463 437ZM219 418C277 418 314 362 314 284C314 205 275 166 231 165C176 165 137 221 137 299C137 376 177 418 219 418ZM241 -11C285 -11 314 -14 339 -24C367 -36 384 -61 384 -95C384 -157 335 -206 240 -206C166 -206 108 -165 108 -110C108 -82 128 -54 154 -32C172 -17 195 -11 241 -11Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,16.063,0)"><path d="M300 -147C201 -63 143 98 143 270S200 602 300 686L282 710C136 610 70 450 70 271V270C70 89 136 -72 282 -170L300 -147Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,20.561,0)"><path d="M495 86L479 114C446 82 419 66 409 66C401 66 401 72 406 97C420 166 436 231 453 297C489 435 454 448 428 448C406 448 384 439 354 422C305 394 222 327 161 247H159L183 345C200 415 194 448 173 448C143 448 82 410 23 351L38 325C64 349 95 371 105 371C111 371 116 365 109 336L25 -4L31 -12C50 -4 77 3 107 9C119 69 132 122 145 168C197 254 321 381 370 381C387 381 393 374 378 305L329 95C309 17 320 -12 345 -12C372 -12 430 19 495 86Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,27.087,0)"><path d="M275 270C275 450 212 609 64 710L45 686C145 604 203 442 203 270S147 -63 45 -147L64 -170C213 -68 275 89 275 270Z"></path></g></svg>.</span> The bottom shows the standard deviation of the F1-score vs. <span class="nowrap"><svg height="12.6721pt" id="M383" style="vertical-align:-3.38377pt" version="1.1" viewbox="-0.0498162 -9.28833 31.7429 12.6721" width="31.7429pt" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,0,0)"><path d="M238 0V26C174 32 166 38 166 104V712C132 700 70 683 18 677V653C81 647 87 645 87 577V104C87 38 78 32 15 26V0H238Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,3.289,0)"><path d="M257 449C165 449 37 374 37 209C37 98 119 -12 256 -12C355 -12 473 65 473 226C473 349 381 449 257 449ZM244 416C333 416 380 320 380 204C380 67 329 21 267 21C184 21 130 115 130 241C130 354 184 416 244 416Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,9.919,0)"><path d="M463 437C426 431 375 425 327 422C297 440 264 449 231 449H230C153 449 51 396 51 283C51 215 94 168 139 149C123 129 91 103 51 88C50 78 53 60 62 46C75 25 100 2 136 -9C112 -28 73 -59 53 -79C38 -94 29 -113 29 -135C30 -192 91 -257 203 -257C336 -257 452 -160 452 -59C452 39 371 59 309 59C275 59 240 58 203 58C158 58 140 77 140 96C140 110 157 129 170 138C186 135 205 133 221 133C306 133 396 185 396 293C396 328 384 360 366 381L423 378C439 387 459 413 468 429L463 437ZM219 418C277 418 314 362 314 284C314 205 275 166 231 165C176 165 137 221 137 299C137 376 177 418 219 418ZM241 -11C285 -11 314 -14 339 -24C367 -36 384 -61 384 -95C384 -157 335 -206 240 -206C166 -206 108 -165 108 -110C108 -82 128 -54 154 -32C172 -17 195 -11 241 -11Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,16.063,0)"><path d="M300 -147C201 -63 143 98 143 270S200 602 300 686L282 710C136 610 70 450 70 271V270C70 89 136 -72 282 -170L300 -147Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,20.561,0)"><path d="M495 86L479 114C446 82 419 66 409 66C401 66 401 72 406 97C420 166 436 231 453 297C489 435 454 448 428 448C406 448 384 439 354 422C305 394 222 327 161 247H159L183 345C200 415 194 448 173 448C143 448 82 410 23 351L38 325C64 349 95 371 105 371C111 371 116 365 109 336L25 -4L31 -12C50 -4 77 3 107 9C119 69 132 122 145 168C197 254 321 381 370 381C387 381 393 374 378 305L329 95C309 17 320 -12 345 -12C372 -12 430 19 495 86Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,27.087,0)"><path d="M275 270C275 450 212 609 64 710L45 686C145 604 203 442 203 270S147 -63 45 -147L64 -170C213 -68 275 89 275 270Z"></path></g></svg>.</span></div>

Mathematical Problems in Engineering

fig8

Figure 8

Figure 8: Two Statistical Approaches to Justify the Use of the Logistic Function in Binary Logistic Regression 