Cluster-Specific Localized Drift Detection for Efficient Batch Model Adaptation under Controlled Distribution Shift

Machine learning systems deployed in dynamic environments frequently operate under nonstationary data distributions, where controlled distribution shift can progressively degrade predictive performance. However, many widely used tabular benchmark datasets lack explicit temporal structure, limiting reproducible evaluation of drift adaptation methods. This work proposes a cluster-induced distribution shift simulation framework that transforms static tabular datasets into controlled evolving data streams through structured perturbations across featurespace partitions. Using this framework, six adaptation strategies are systematically evaluated: static learning, sliding-window retraining, global ADWIN retraining, cluster-local ADWIN retraining, random subspace drift detection, and feature-partitioned drift detection. Experiments are conducted on five benchmark datasets covering both classification and regression tasks using diverse predictive model families, including linear models, k-Nearest Neighbours, tree ensembles, boosting methods, and adaptive online learners.

Evaluating Supervised Machine Learning Models: Principles, Pitfalls, and Metric Selection

The evaluation of supervised machine learning models is a critical stage in the development of reliable predictive systems. Despite the widespread availability of machine learning libraries and automated workflows, model assessment is often reduced to the reporting of a small set of aggregate metrics, which can lead to misleading conclusions about real-world performance. This paper examines the principles, challenges, and practical considerations involved in evaluating supervised learning algorithms across classification and regression tasks. In particular, it discusses how evaluation outcomes are influenced by dataset characteristics, validation design, class imbalance, asymmetric error costs, and the choice of performance metrics. Through a series of controlled experimental scenarios using diverse benchmark datasets, the study highlights common pitfalls such as the accuracy paradox, data leakage, inappropriate metric selection, and overreliance on scalar summary measures. The paper also compares alternative validation strategies and emphasizes the importance of aligning model evaluation with the intended operational objective of the task. By presenting evaluation as a decision-oriented and context-dependent process, this work provides a structured foundation for selecting metrics and validation protocols that support statistically sound, robust, and trustworthy supervised machine learning systems.