Table 3.

Performance comparison of the proposed method with some state-of-the-art methods

Method	Accuracy (%)
Thomas et al. [21]	97.68
Kaur et al. [22]	99.06
Rai et al. [23]	99.60
Khalaf et al. [24]	98.60
Dong et al. [2]	97.78
Proposed	99.90