Table 3. Simulation results for comparing the differences in predictive performance of two prediction models under quota sampling NCC (QNCC) designs.

	Model 1		Model 2		Model 1 − Model 2
	Est.	SE	Est.	SE	True	Est.	SE	SD	Cov.
TPRt(0.25)	0.686	0.022	0.644	0.025	0.041	0.042	0.017	0.017	0.944
FPRt(0.25)	0.148	0.014	0.161	0.015	−0.011	−0.013	0.009	0.009	0.947
PCF(0.2)	0.614	0.018	0.569	0.019	0.045	0.045	0.011	0.011	0.928
PNFt(0.85)	0.58	0.019	0.527	0.019	0.05	0.053	0.013	0.012	0.933
AUCt	0.859	0.009	0.83	0.011	0.027	0.029	0.007	0.007	0.920
Mean( t|T ≤ t)	0.767	0.012	0.739	0.013	0.024	0.028	0.012	0.012	0.933
Mean ( t|T > t)	0.215	0.012	0.24	0.013	−0.024	−0.025	0.011	0.011	0.948
MRDt	0.552	0.018	0.499	0.019	0.047	0.053	0.013	0.013	0.912
TPRt(ρ)	0.46	0.02	0.411	0.021	0.051	0.05	0.012	0.011	0.938
FPRt(ρ)	0.124	0.007	0.136	0.008	−0.011	−0.012	0.003	0.003	0.945
AARDt	0.336	0.022	0.275	0.022	0.063	0.061	0.014	0.014	0.937
NBt(p)	0.116	0.009	0.108	0.009	0.008	0.008	0.003	0.003	0.946

Est. mean estimates, SD empirical standard deviation, SE average of the estimated standard error, CP empirical coverage level of the 95 % confidence intervals for proposed estimators