Table 2.
The maximum F1 scores of each peak alignment method for Dataset I and II
| Dataset | Method | k | ρ (w) | Distance | F1 | 95% CI of F1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I | PAD | Canberra | 0.9652 | (0.9600–0.9704) | ||
| PAS | 0.9023 | (0.8888–0.9157) | ||||
| DW-PAS | 3 | Euclidean | 0.9618 | (0.9546–0.9690) | ||
| SW-PAD | 0.5 | Canberra | 0.9766 | (0.9716–0.9817) | ||
| PAM | 0.5 | Canberra | 0.9810 | (0.9771–0.9849) | ||
| II | PAD | Manhattan | 0.4729 | (0.4382–0.5076) | ||
| PAS | 0.6109 | (0.5908–0.6310) | ||||
| DW-PAS | 15 | Canberra | 0.5932 | (0.5716–0.6149) | ||
| SW-PAD | 0.93 | Manhattan | 0.5954 | (0.5687–0.6221) | ||
| PAM | 0.05 | Manhattana | 0.6148 | (0.5945–0.6351) | ||
aEuclidean and Maximum have the same F1 value as that of Manhattan.