You are presented with multiple paper abstracts, alongside the associated literature review and chapter titles. Given the provided information, you are going to do a literature review. Please generate a coherent literature review that synthesizes the content, draws connections between different works, highlights major findings, and identifies any gaps in the existing research.

Literature Review Title: A Review on Quantification Learning 
Chapter Title:  Performance Measures for Other Quantification Problems 
1. Abstract of Cited Paper (BIB001):  Many business applications track changes over time, for example, measuring the monthly prevalence of influenza incidents. In situations where a classifier is needed to identify the relevant incidents, imperfect classification accuracy can cause substantial bias in estimating class prevalence. The paper defines two research challenges for machine learning. The `quantification' task is to accurately estimate the number of positive cases (or class distribution) in a test set, using a training set that may have a substantially different distribution. The `cost quantification' variant estimates the total cost associated with the positive class, where each case is tagged with a cost attribute, such as the expense to resolve the case. Quantification has a very different utility model from traditional classification research. For both forms of quantification, the paper describes a variety of methods and evaluates them with a suitable methodology, revealing which methods give reliable estimates when training data is scarce, the testing class distribution differs widely from training, and the positive class is rare, e.g., 1% positives. These strengths can make quantification practical for business use, even where classification accuracy is poor. 
2. Abstract of Cited Paper (BIB002):  The increasing availability of participatory web and social media presents enormous opportunities to study human relations and collective behaviors. Many applications involving decision making want to obtain certain generalized properties about the population in a network, such as the proportion of actors given a category, instead of the category of individuals. While data mining and machine learning researchers have developed many methods for link-based classification or relational learning, most are optimized to classify individual nodes in a network. In order to accurately estimate the prevalence of one class in a network, some quantification method has to be used. In this work, two kinds of approaches are presented: quantification based on classification or quantification based on link analysis. Extensive experiments are conducted on several representative network data, with interesting findings reported concerning efficacy and robustness of different quantification methods, providing insights to further quantify the ebb and flow of online collective behaviors at macro-level. 
3. Abstract of Cited Paper (BIB003):  In many real-world applications there is a need to monitor the distribution of a population across different classes, and to track changes in this distribution over time. As an example, an important task is to monitor the percentage of unemployed adults in a given region. When the membership of an individual in a class cannot be established deterministically, a typical solution is the classification task. However, in the above applications the final goal is not determining which class the individuals belong to, but estimating the prevalence of each class in the unlabeled data. This task is called quantification. Most of the work in the literature addressed the quantification problem considering data presented in conventional attribute format. Since the ever-growing availability of web and social media we have a flourish of network data representing a new important source of information and by using quantification network techniques we could quantify collective behavior, i.e., the number of users that are involved in certain type of activities, preferences, or behaviors. In this paper we exploit the homophily effect observed in many social networks in order to construct a quantifier for networked data. Our experiments show the effectiveness of the proposed approaches and the comparison with the existing state-of-the-art quantification methods shows that they are more accurate. 
4. Abstract of Cited Paper (BIB004):  In recent years there has been a growing interest in text quantification, a supervised learning task where the goal is to accurately estimate, in an unlabelled set of items, the prevalence (or "relative frequency") of each class c in a predefined set C. Text quantification has several applications, and is a dominant concern in fields such as market research, the social sciences, political science, and epidemiology. In this paper we tackle, for the first time, the problem of ordinal text quantification, defined as the task of performing text quantification when a total order is defined on the set of classes; estimating the prevalence of "five stars" reviews in a set of reviews of a given product, and monitoring this prevalence across time, is an example application. We present OQT, a novel tree-based OQ algorithm, and discuss experimental results obtained on a dataset of tweets classified according to sentiment strength.

Literature Review:
Only a few loss functions have been proposed for other quantification problems. BIB002 employs absolute error in cost quantification tasks to measure the error of the normalized cost. To the best of our knowledge, no other loss functions have been applied for cost quantification. Given that networked data quantification is in many cases a binary or multi-class quantification problem, the performance measures used are the most classic measures for binary and multi-class quantification. For instance, BIB003 employs bias (12), absolute error (13), and KL Divergence (10). BIB004 just uses KL Divergence. Earth Movers Distance (EMD) BIB001 is the only measure proposed for ordinal quantification BIB005 . EMD is a routinely used in computer vision and is defined as EMD ranges between 0 (best) and l − 1 (worst). Quantification algorithms for regression demand two types of performance measures quite different between them. On the one hand, classical regression metrics to measure the precision of single numerical predictions (typically the mean) are required. On the other hand, metrics for comparing distributions are also needed.