Table 3.
Ranking of all 36 combinations of Method and Sampling scheme (time, type) when drivers are known with respect to each performance measure
| Method and sampling | Conjunction | No conjunction | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Diff | PFD | PND | FPF | Diff | PFD | PND | FPF | ||
| OT-A, last, singleC | 1 | 2 | 14 | 10 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 15 | |
| OT-A, last, wholeT_0.5 | 2 | 1 | 15 | 12 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 14 | |
| OT-A, last, wholeT_0.01 | 3 | 3 | 7 | 22 | 3 | 6 | 1 | 22 | |
| OT-A, unif, singleC | 4 | 6 | 19 | 13 | 4 | 9 | 12.5 | 9.5 | |
| OT, unif, singleC | 5 | 5 | 20 | 11 | 5 | 7 | 12.5 | 9.5 | |
| OT-A, unif, wholeT_0.01 | 8 | 11 | 16 | 24 | 8 | 11 | 5 | 24 | |
| OT, last, singleC | 10 | 9 | 23 | 1 | 10 | 1 | 17 | 2 | |
| OT, last, wholeT_0.01 | 11 | 4 | 18 | 18 | 12 | 5 | 14 | 18 | |
| OT, last, wholeT_0.5 | 12 | 7 | 24 | 2 | 11 | 2 | 23 | 1 | |
| CBN-A, unif, wholeT_0.01 | 13 | 13 | 1 | 26 | 13 | 13 | 4 | 26 | |
| CBN-A, unif, singleC | 14 | 16 | 2 | 28 | 15 | 15 | 9 | 29 | |
| CBN-A, unif, wholeT_0.5 | 15 | 18 | 3 | 34 | 14 | 16 | 8 | 31 | |
| CBN, unif, singleC | 16 | 17 | 5 | 29 | 17 | 19 | 10 | 34 | |
| CBN, unif, wholeT_0.01 | 17 | 14 | 4 | 27 | 18 | 14 | 6 | 27 | |
| DiP-A, unif, singleC | 31 | 28 | 31 | 4 | 31 | 30 | 31 | 6 | |
| DiP, last, wholeT_0.5 | 33 | 35 | 34 | 5 | 34 | 34 | 36 | 5 | |
| DiP, unif, singleC | 35 | 31 | 33 | 3 | 35 | 32 | 33 | 3 | |
| DiP, unif, wholeT_0.5 | 36 | 36 | 36 | 6 | 36 | 36 | 35 | 4 | |
Methods have been ordered by their performance in the first performance measure. Best five methods are shown in bold. Only methods that are within the best five in at least one performance measure are shown (full table as well as tables split by S.Size are available from Additional file 2).