Skip to main content
. 2023 Nov 9;9:e1567. doi: 10.7717/peerj-cs.1567

Table 8. Evaluation results—sample analysis.

K |R| Precision Recall
Gatsby
5 3 100% (3/3) 8.82% (3/34)
10 4 100% (4/4) 11.76% (4/34)
20 5 100% (5/5) 14.70% (5/34)
30 6 100% (6/6) 17.64% (6/34)
40 7 100% (7/7) 20.58% (7/34)
50 9 100% (9/9) 26.47% (9/34)
60 10 100% (10/10) 29.41% (10/34)
70 11 100% (11/11) 32.35% (11/34)
80 14 100% (14/14) 41.17% (14/34)
90 16 100% (16/16) 47.05% (16/34)
100 19 89.47% (17/19) 50.00% (17/34)
110 21 85.71% (18/21) 52.94% (18/34)
120 29 72.41% (21/29) 61.76% (21/34)
Homebrew
5 4 100% (4/4) 6.66% (4/60)
10 6 100% (6/6) 10.00% (6/60)
20 23 95.65% (22/23) 36.66% (22/60)
30 42 78.57% (33/42) 55.00% (33/60)
40 60 66.66% (40/60) 66.66% (40/60)
Next.js
5 16 100% (16/16) 15.38% (16/104)
10 24 100% (24/24) 23.07% (24/104)
20 42 76.19% (32/42) 30.76% (32/104)
30 60 65.00% (39/60) 37.50% (39/104)
40 75 60.00% (45/75) 43.26% (45/104)