{{ data.metrics.resilience_score | format_number(3) }}
{{ data.metrics.base_score | format_number(3) }}
{{ data.metrics.avg_distribution_shift | format_number(3) }}
{{ data.metrics.max_performance_gap | format_percentage(2) }}
Interpretation: {% if data.metrics.resilience_score >= 0.8 %} Excellent resilience! The model maintains performance well under distribution shifts. {% elif data.metrics.resilience_score >= 0.6 %} Good resilience. The model is reasonably stable under distribution changes. {% else %} Low resilience. The model is sensitive to distribution shifts and may require improvement. {% endif %}
The worst scenario showed a performance gap of {{ data.metrics.max_performance_gap | format_percentage(2) }}, while the average performance gap was {{ data.metrics.avg_performance_gap | format_percentage(2) }}.
{% endif %}| Rank | Feature Name | Importance |
|---|---|---|
| {{ feature.rank }} | {{ feature.feature_name }} | {{ feature.importance | format_number(4) }} |
| Distance Metric | Alpha | Feature | Baseline Score | Shifted Score | Performance Gap |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| {{ result.distance_metric }} | {{ result.alpha | format_number(2) }} | {{ result.feature_name }} | {{ result.baseline_score | format_number(4) }} | {{ result.shifted_score | format_number(4) }} | {{ result.performance_gap | format_percentage(2) }} |