Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2018 Oct 7.
Published in final edited form as: J Magn Reson Imaging. 2018 Feb 7;48(4):938–950. doi: 10.1002/jmri.25963

TABLE 4.

Evaluating Accuracy and Diagnostic Performances (AUC) of LDA, QDA, and SVM Classifiers on the Selected Featuresa

Feature selection method Selected features Accuracy (%) AUC (95% CI) (%)
Cross-Validated LDA
Backward AIC CBV, FLAIR, MD, T2_ISO 82.8 89.3 (75.9-100)
Backward BIC CBV, MD 75.4 74.7 (55.0-94.4)
Forward/Stepwise AIC CBV, D, T2_ISO 82.1 91.9 (83.1-100)
Backward BIC CBV, D 74.8 73.2 (54.4-91.6)
Cross-Validated QDA
Backward AIC CBV, FLAIR, MD, T2_ISO 85.1 92.4 (84.1-100)
Backward BIC CBV, MD 79.9 80.0 (61.8-98.0)
Forward/Stepwise AIC CBV, D, T2_ISO 83.4 85.3 (71.2-99.1)
Backward BIC CBV, D 81.2 84.8 (69.1-99.4)
Cross-Validated SVM
Backward AIC CBV, FLAIR, MD, T2_ISO 91.3 91.9 (79.6-100)
Backward BIC CBV, MD 80.2 79.8 (61.4-98.1)
Forward/Stepwise AIC CBV, D, T2_ISO 79.3 83.0 (65.9-99.7)
Backward BIC CBV, D 79.3 81.4 (63.6-98.8)
a

The gray-shaded cells with bold-type face numbers or letters indicate highest diagnostic performances.