Table 5.

Analysis of the statistical significance of the respiratory/wheezing SDR, SIR and SAR results comparing the proposed method (IIS-NMPCF) with the other evaluated methods using an one-sided paired t-test in the databases T1M (see Figure 8).

Method	SDR${}_{\mathit{r}}$	SIR${}_{\mathit{r}}$	SAR${}_{\mathit{r}}$	SDR${}_{\mathit{w}}$	SIR${}_{\mathit{w}}$	SAR${}_{\mathit{w}}$
NMF	$4\times {10}^{-13}$	$4.1\times {10}^{-14}$	$9.4\times {10}^{-2}$	$6.2\times {10}^{-13}$	$2\times {10}^{-12}$	$2.7\times {10}^{-9}$
SNMF	$4.3\times {10}^{-13}$	$7.3\times {10}^{-13}$	$4.3\times {10}^{-2}$	$2.8\times {10}^{-13}$	$1\times {10}^{-10}$	$1.3\times {10}^{-10}$
SSNMF	$9.7\times {10}^{-11}$	$2.3\times {10}^{-10}$	$2.5\times {10}^{-6}$	$5.6\times {10}^{-11}$	$4.3\times {10}^{-10}$	$2.9\times {10}^{-7}$
2S-NMPCF	$6.9\times {10}^{-11}$	$1.1\times {10}^{-11}$	$4.9\times {10}^{-6}$	$5.1\times {10}^{-11}$	$5.8\times {10}^{-11}$	$3.5\times {10}^{-8}$
1S-NMPCF	$8.7\times {10}^{-8}$	$4.9\times {10}^{-10}$	$1.3\times {10}^{-6}$	$1.7\times {10}^{-8}$	$1.4\times {10}^{-9}$	$3.3\times {10}^{-7}$
T-NMPCF	$9.7\times {10}^{-9}$	$3.7\times {10}^{-9}$	$1.1\times {10}^{-7}$	$6.9\times {10}^{-9}$	$1.6\times {10}^{-7}$	$1.2\times {10}^{-9}$
CNMF	$9.6\times {10}^{-7}$	$1.1\times {10}^{-5}$	$5.7\times {10}^{-5}$	$9.4\times {10}^{-6}$	$7.4\times {10}^{-5}$	$5.2\times {10}^{-7}$
ST-NMPCF	$1.9\times {10}^{-4}$	$1.6\times {10}^{-4}$	$4.4\times {10}^{-2}$	$8.4\times {10}^{-5}$	$4.3\times {10}^{-4}$	$1.3\times {10}^{-9}$
IIS${}_0$-NMPCF	$4.1\times {10}^{-2}$	$6.3\times {10}^{-4}$	$4\times {10}^{-1}$	$2\times {10}^{-2}$	$3.1\times {10}^{-2}$	$3.3\times {10}^{-4}$

Each cell shows the parameter $\rho$ that represents the probability of setting a statistically significant result. Considering a confidence interval of 95%, small values of $\rho$ < 0.05 indicate that there exists statistical significance of the results evaluated.