Let's say I have a binary classification dataset skewed towards negative samples. Let's say it's 1000 positives and 100000 negatives. Let's say it's image data.
I'm training a classifier and I'm using data augmentation on positives to attenuate the imbalance issue.
At each training epoch I sample my positives from a pool of random transforms, some with random parameters itself (e.g. horizontal flip, vertical flip, random rotation, random zoom, random crop).
I also sample an equivalent number of negatives from the whole negative pool. So at each epoch I have the same number of positive and negative examples.
I can tell from validation the thing is somewhat working, but how do I estimate how much imbalance am I effectively removing?
Some source says I apply N transforms to positives so I am increasing the positive set size N times. But each transform is random itself and it returns a different (albeit correlated) sample each time, so the effective set is bigger... but how much?
Maybe I could compare variances of the whole negative and transformed positive pool?