Table 7. Freeland & Hurst (1998) reported the first 15 codes that outperformed the WMS01 value.
We evaluated these 15 reported codes with the WMS02, tMS0 and the fMS scores as described in this work. For the WMS01 score, following from construction, all 15 codes are better than the SGC, code 13 (marked bold) reached the lowest score. For the WMS02 score, only three codes (bold) reach lower values, all of these codes have been reported by Freeland & Hurst (1998) to also become more robust when increasing the transition weighting (see Fig. 1). For the tMS0 score, none of these codes outperform the SGC, only code 2 at least reaches an equally low score. For the frame shift score fMS, only code 13 reaches a better score.
| Measure | SGC | 01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05 | 06 | 07 | 08 | 09 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WMS01 | 5.19 | 4.80 | 5.11 | 4.87 | 5.05 | 5.14 | 5.13 | 4.99 | 5.14 | 5.00 | 5.10 | 4.91 | 5.14 | 4.72 | 5.06 | 5.17 |
| WMS02 | 4.66 | 4.97 | 4.70 | 4.73 | 4.83 | 5.26 | 4.64 | 5.25 | 4.98 | 4.39 | 5.03 | 4.99 | 5.09 | 4.60 | 4.96 | 5.31 |
| tMS0 | 2.63 | 3.93 | 2.63 | 4.08 | 4.30 | 3.04 | 4.18 | 2.97 | 3.78 | 3.85 | 4.14 | 3.85 | 3.84 | 3.06 | 4.93 | 3.59 |
| fMS | 6.11 | 6.20 | 8.99 | 8.99 | 6.34 | 8.96 | 9.64 | 12.24 | 7.60 | 8.49 | 7.55 | 11.27 | 7.89 | 5.59 | 7.55 | 7.80 |