aiqbench analysis
This study exposes critical trustworthiness failures in the widely used IBM Telco Customer Churn benchmark, revealing how data leakage from pre-split SMOTE and redundant features artificially inflate reported accuracy by up to 13.1 percentage points. The authors further demonstrate that relying on F1-optimal thresholds ignores cost-sensitive realities, potentially costing businesses tens of thousands of dollars per cohort compared to a calibrated, cost-aware approach. These findings provide an essential checklist for practitioners aiming to move beyond vanity metrics toward robust, reproducible machine learning pipelines.
The Hidden Costs of 99% Accuracy: A Trustworthiness Audit of the Telco Customer Churn Benchmark
arXiv:2610.00118v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Customer churn prediction on the IBM Telco Customer Churn benchmark (n = 7,043) routinely reports test accuracies above 95%, with the most cited published study reporting 99.01%. We audit this benchmark for four trustworthiness failures invisible to the accuracy- and F1-centred reporting that dominates the literature. First, pre-split SMOTE inflates churn-class F1 by 13.1 percentage points across ten classifiers and fifteen seeds (Wilcoxon p 0.95 pre-modelling diagnostic. Third, in a 15-seed calibration audit, isotonic regression is the strongest default; temperature scaling fails on class-weighted tree ensembles whose predicted-probability distribution is bimodal. Fourth, the cost-optimal decision threshold (under a 50 USD retention offer and 24-month CLV proxy) is approximately 5-10 times lower than the F1-optimal threshold, saving approximately 77,000 USD per 1,000 customers. We replicate F1 and F2 on Iranian Telecom Churn (within domain) and Bank Customer Churn (across domain): F1 generalises; F2 generalises only within telecom. We synthesise these findings into a four-component reporting checklist - pipeline disclosure, redundancy diagnostic, calibration audit, and cost-sensitive thresholds - and release a reproducible implementation.
Abstract:Customer churn prediction on the IBM Telco Customer Churn benchmark (n = 7,043) routinely reports test accuracies above 95%, with the most cited published study reporting 99.01%. We audit this benchmark for four trustworthiness failures invisible to the accuracy- and F1-centred reporting that dominates the literature. First, pre-split SMOTE inflates churn-class F1 by 13.1 percentage points across ten classifiers and fifteen seeds (Wilcoxon p < 10^-4 per classifier); the same leaky pipeline ordering paired with class weighting yields no inflation, isolating the effect to SMOTE's geometric construction. We measure the mechanism directly: approximately 36% of synthetic training points are nearest-neighbour interpolations of test-set instances. Second, the TotalCharges field is approximately determined by tenure multiplied by MonthlyCharges (R2 = 0.999); removing it changes accuracy by less than 0.2 percentage points, yet TreeSHAP ranks it ninth in mean absolute attribution - a pattern that materially corrupts SHAP-based interpretation. We propose an R2 > 0.95 pre-modelling diagnostic. Third, in a 15-seed calibration audit, isotonic regression is the strongest default; temperature scaling fails on class-weighted tree ensembles whose predicted-probability distribution is bimodal. Fourth, the cost-optimal decision threshold (under a 50 USD retention offer and 24-month CLV proxy) is approximately 5-10 times lower than the F1-optimal threshold, saving approximately 77,000 USD per 1,000 customers. We replicate F1 and F2 on Iranian Telecom Churn (within domain) and Bank Customer Churn (across domain): F1 generalises; F2 generalises only within telecom. We synthesise these findings into a four-component reporting checklist - pipeline disclosure, redundancy diagnostic, calibration audit, and cost-sensitive thresholds - and release a reproducible implementation.
Machine Learning (cs.LG)
arXiv:2610.00118 [cs.LG]
(or arXiv:2610.00118v1 [cs.LG] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.00118 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 350 words
Related coverage

Vertical Advantage: Transforming Industries with Lakebase and Agentic AI
Databricks · Aug 27, 2026

Handling Imbalanced Classification: What Works Better Than SMOTE
Analytics Vidhya · Jul 12, 2026

Introducing Claude Opus 5
Anthropic · Jul 24, 2026

Cracking the Data Science Case Study Interview
Analytics Vidhya · Jul 26, 2026