Table 8. Performance comparison of different methods on Z277 dataset.
Method | Prediction accuracy (%) | ||||
All-α | All-β | α/β | α+β | Overall | |
Rough sets by Cao et al.(2006) [20] | 77.1 | 77.0 | 93.8 | 66.2 | 79.4 |
Information-theoretical approach by Zheng et al. (2010) [22] | 87.1 | 80.3 | 93.8 | 67.7 | 83.0 |
LogitBoost by Feng et al. (2005) [21] | 81.4 | 88.5 | 92.6 | 72.3 | 84.1 |
VPMCD by Raghuraj and Lakshminarayanan(2008) [38] | 85.7 | 85.0 | 92.9 | 84.4 | 84.2 |
IGA-SVM by Li et al. (2008) [24] | 84.3 | 88.5 | 92.6 | 70.7 | 84.5 |
CWT-PCA-SVM by Li et al. (2009) [25] | 85.7 | 90.2 | 87.7 | 80.1 | 85.9 |
Markov-SVM by Qin et al. (2012) [27] | 90.0 | 85.2 | 86.4 | 81.5 | 85.9 |
AAC-PSSM-AC by Liu et al. (2012) [23] | 88.6 | 95.1 | 97.5 | 81.5 | 91.0 |
Our method | 100.00 | 98.31 | 100.00 | 100.00 | 99.64 |