Table 3.
Comparison of different methods on CL317 data set.
| Method | SN (%) | ACC (%) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cy | Me | Mi | Se | Nu | En | ||
| ID [39] | 81.3 | 81.8 | 85.3 | 88.2 | 82.7 | 83.0 | 82.7 |
| ID_SVM [40] | 91.1 | 89.1 | 79.4 | 58.8 | 73.1 | 87.2 | 84.2 |
| DF_SVM [42] | 92.9 | 85.5 | 76.5 | 76.5 | 93.6 | 86.5 | 88.0 |
| Auto_Cova [47] | 86.4 | 90.7 | 93.8 | 85.7 | 92.1 | 93.8 | 90.0 |
| FKNN [41] | 93.8 | 92.7 | 82.4 | 76.5 | 90.4 | 93.6 | 90.9 |
| PseAAC_SVM [45] | 93.8 | 90.9 | 85.3 | 76.5 | 90.4 | 95.7 | 91.1 |
| EN_FKNN [46] | 98.2 | 83.6 | 79.4 | 82.4 | 90.4 | 97.9 | 91.5 |
| PSSM-AC [44] | 93.8 | 90.9 | 91.2 | 82.4 | 86.5 | 95.7 | 91.5 |
| APSLAP [48] | 99.1 | 89.1 | 85.3 | 88.2 | 84.3 | 95.8 | 92.4 |
| Trigram encoding [50] | 98.2 | 96.4 | 94.1 | 82.4 | 96.2 | 95.7 | 95.9 |
| Our method | 98.2 | 98.2 | 97.1 | 94.1 | 90.2 | 100 | 96.8 |