Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2016 Jan 1.
Published in final edited form as: Pattern Recognit. 2014 Aug 6;48(1):276–287. doi: 10.1016/j.patcog.2014.07.025

Table 3.

Numbers of wins–ties–losses (superior–equal–inferior AUC) between the eight methods (pairwise) on the 34 UCI datasets. For three numbers shown in each entry of the table, the first is the number of wins of corresponding method shown on the left column compared with the corresponding method shown on the top; middle is the number of ties between them and the third is the number of losses. (M1:SVM; M2:SVMROC; M3:RankBoost; M4:OPAUC; M5:SVMlin; M6:SSRankBoost; M7:SSLROC1; M8:SSLROC2).

Method M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 M7 M8
M1 0–34–0 13–6–15 25–1–8 17–2–15 19–2–13 23–1–10 7–2–25 5–2–27
M2 15–6–13 0–34–0 26–1–7 19–2–13 18–2–14 27–1–6 7–2–25 6–2–26
M3 8–1–25 7–1–26 0–34–0 11–1–22 9–1–24 9–3–22 5–1–28 5–1–28
M4 15–2–17 13–2–19 22–1–11 0–34–0 13–3–18 21–1–12 7–2–25 9–2–23
M5 13–2–19 14–2–18 24–1–9 18–3–13 0–34–0 23–1–10 7–2–25 9–2–23
M6 10–1–23 6–1–27 22–3–9 12–1–21 10–1–23 0–34–0 5–1–28 5–1–28
M7 25–2–7 25–2–7 28–1–5 25–2–7 25–2–7 28–1–5 0–34–0 15–6–13
M8 27–2–5 26–2–6 28–1–5 23–2–9 23–2–9 28–1–5 13–6–15 0–34–0