Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2016 Jan 1.
Published in final edited form as: Neurobiol Aging. 2014 Aug 29;36 Suppl 1:S185–S193. doi: 10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2014.07.045

Table 3.

Cross validation performance comparison of linear regression, ridge regression, PLS, ℓ2,1-norm, and G-SMuRFS: performance is measured by the root mean squared error (RMSE) and correlation coefficient (CC) between the actual and predicted scores of the test subjects. The average (avg) and standard deviation (std) of performance measures across five cross-validation trials are shown as “avg±std” for each experiment.

(a) Performance comparison using RMSE ADAS MMSE RAVLT
TOTAL T30 RECOG
G-SMuRFS 0.7663±0.0375 0.8325±0.0399 0.8490±0.0654 0.8776±0.0701 0.9167±0.0471
2,1-norm 0.7631±0.0346 0.8322±0.0411 0.8464±0.0697 0.8807±0.0657 0.9215±0.0440
PLS 0.8844±0.0425 0.8999±0.0453 0.9246±0.0533 0.9515±0.0578 0.9706±0.0512
Ridge 0.7859±0.0327 0.8579±0.0332 0.8453±0.0697 0.8977±0.0553 0.9315±0.0430
Linear 1.0524±0.0559 1.1342±0.0739 1.1726±0.0956 1.3042±0.0803 1.2775±0.1168
(b) Performance comparison using CC ADAS MMSE RAVLT
TOTAL T30 RECOG
G-SMuRFS 0.6438±0.0258 0.5552±0.0078 0.5277±0.0539 0.4753±0.0591 0.3985±0.0533
2,1-norm 0.6468±0.0175 0.5548±0.0058 0.5301±0.0544 0.4692±0.0522 0.3889±0.0588
Partial Least Square 0.4608±0.0551 0.4339±0.0406 0.3782±0.0591 0.3037±0.0565 0.2390±0.0382
Ridge 0.6167±0.0171 0.5127±0.0272 0.5296±0.0540 0.4364±0.0416 0.3632±0.0681
Linear 0.4902±0.0544 0.3779±0.0246 0.3685±0.1005 0.2958±0.1359 0.2533±0.0726