Table 1.

Comparison of classification performances (%) of the competing methods.

Modality	Method	AD vs. NC				MCI vs. NC
		ACC	SEN	SPE	AUC	ACC	SEN	SPE	AUC
MRI	MRI-N	89.5	82.7	86.3	95.3	68.3	92.6	39.2	82.5
	MRI-S	91.2	85.9	92.5	96.7	76.7	93.3	37.6	83.7
	HOGM	93.4	89.5	92.5	97.1	77.7	95.6	51.4	84.4
	M3T	92.6	87.2	95.9	97.5	78.1	94.5	54.0	83.1
	SJCR	92.5	89.6	96.1	97.5	77.9	95.2	52.7	84.9
	Proposed	93.8	89.7	96.7	97.9	79.7	95.0	56.1	85.2
PET	PET-N	86.2	83.5	84.8	94.8	69.0	95.0	30.8	77.9
	PET-S	87.9	85.7	90.9	94.7	73.8	96.5	36.2	78.7
	HOGM	91.7	91.1	92.8	95.6	74.7	96.5	43.2	79.3
	M3T	90.9	90.5	93.1	96.4	77.2	94.5	44.3	80.5
	SJCR	91.6	83.7	93.6	95.9	73.8	96.4	23.2	80.8
	Proposed	92.3	92.3	93.9	96.6	79.1	96.1	47.2	81.2
MP	MP-N	89.7	92.2	85.9	96.1	71.6	96.1	43.9	82.7
	MP-S	90.8	92.6	93.8	96.7	76.3	97.0	39.9	83.4
	M2TFS-C	91.0	90.4	91.4	95.0	73.4	76.5	67.1	78.0
	M2TFS-K	95.0	94.9	95.0	97.0	79.3	85.9	66.6	82.0
	HOGM	95.2	92.8	95.4	97.8	79.5	96.6	58.6	84.6
	M3T	94.0	92.0	96.3	98.0	78.4	95.0	57.7	83.9
	SJCR	93.4	92.7	96.5	96.8	78.2	96.1	54.4	83.1
	Proposed	95.3	93.5	98.1	98.3	80.2	96.5	59.7	85.5
MPC	MPC-N	90.8	93.1	88.3	96.5	72.5	96.3	47.1	84.1
	MPC-S	92.5	94.1	93.8	97.6	77.1	97.1	47.5	83.9
	HOGM	95.6	94.5	96.9	98.5	80.6	96.7	64.7	86.2
	M3T	94.6	93.1	96.4	98.5	80.1	95.2	58.7	84.3
	SJCR	93.9	92.8	96.5	97.0	78.9	96.2	55.9	83.4
	Proposed	95.9	95.7	98.6	98.8	82.0	98.0	60.1	87.0

(ACC: ACCuracy, SEN: SENsitivity, SPE: SPEcificity, and AUC: Area Under the receiver operating characteristic Curve)