Table 2.
Classification performance of different methods based on GM.
| Method | ACC | SN | SP | GM | DM | F2M |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SVM | 0.6277 | 0.6923 | 0.5711 | 0.6288 | 0.6167 | 0.6339 |
| 2T + SVM | 0.6829 | 0.7226 | 0.6431 | 0.6817 | 0.6741 | 0.6812 |
| RFE + SVM | 0.7326 | 0.8427 | 0.6533 | 0.7420 | 0.7321 | 0.7699 |
| PCA + SVM | 0.7057 | 0.7712 | 0.6521 | 0.7092 | 0.7029 | 0.7103 |
| ICA + SVM | 0.6806 | 0.7114 | 0.6862 | 0.6987 | 0.6571 | 0.6968 |
| TBFS + SVM | 0.7118 | 0.8200 | 0.6267 | 0.7169 | 0.7155 | 0.7327 |
| 2T + PCA + SVM | 0.7981 | 0.8193 | 0.7704 | 0.7945 | 0.7896 | 0.7922 |
| 2T + ICA + SVM | 0.7504 | 0.7727 | 0.7111 | 0.7413 | 0.7359 | 0.7394 |
| 2T + TBFS + SVM | 0.7794 | 0.8009 | 0.7484 | 0.7742 | 0.7658 | 0.7701 |
| Ours | 0.7962 | 0.8142 | 0.7777 | 0.7957 | 0.7851 | 0.7896 |