Table 3.
Comparison of the proposed algorithm with OCFA [11].
| Dataset | Algorithm | Evaluation criteria | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Accuracy | F1-score | Recall | Precision | Time (second) | ||
| Voice | TCFA [11] | 0.92 | — | — | — | 2.6 |
| OCFA [11] | 0.94 | — | — | — | 2.1 | |
| KNN [11] | 0.87 | — | — | — | — | |
| DT [11] | 0.84 | — | — | — | — | |
| CSADT | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.02 | |
|
| ||||||
| Meander | TCFA [11] | 0.88 | — | — | — | 1.3 |
| OCFA [11] | 0.89 | — | — | — | 0.9 | |
| KNN [11] | 0.78 | — | — | — | — | |
| DT [11] | 0.79 | — | — | — | — | |
| CSADT | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.04 | |
|
| ||||||
| Spiral | TCFA [11] | 0.88 | — | — | — | 1.3 |
| OCFA [11] | 0.89 | — | — | — | 1.1 | |
| KNN [11] | 0.82 | — | — | — | — | |
| DT [11] | 0.79 | — | — | — | — | |
| CSADT | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.05 | |