Abstract: This work presents a systematic study of objective evaluations of abstaining classifications using information-theoretic measures (ITMs). First, we define objective measures as the ones which do not depend on any free parameter. According to this definition, technical simplicity for examining "objectivity" or "subjectivity" is directly provided for classification evaluations. Second, we propose 24 normalized ITMs for investigation, which are derived from either mutual information, divergence, or cross-entropy. Contrary to conventional performance measures that apply empirical formulas based on users0 intuitions or preferences, the ITMs are theoretically more general for realizing objective evaluations of classifications. They are able to distinguish "error types" and "reject types" in binary classifications without the need to inputting data of cost terms. Third, to better understand and select the ITMs, we suggest three desirable features for classification assessment measures, which appear more crucial and appealing from the viewpoint of classification applications. Using these features as "meta-measures", we can reveal the advantages and limitations of ITMs from a higher level of evaluation knowledge. Numerical examples are given to demonstrate our claims and compare the differences among the proposed measures. The best measure is