Table 12.
Comparative study between proposed classifier and well-known classifiers on PH2 dataset.
| Classifier | Method | Acc (%) | Sen (%) | Spec (%) | Prec | AUC | Time (in sec) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TREE | CT | 75 | 75 | 75 | 42.85 | 0.83 | 17.11 |
| ST | 76.5 | 77.5 | 76.25 | 44.92 | 0.89 | 4.61 | |
| SVM | LSVM | 97 | 95 | 97.5 | 90.47 | 0.99 | 7.24 |
| CSVM | 96.5 | 90 | 98.12 | 92.30 | 0.96 | 9.43 | |
| QSVM | 97.5 | 95 | 98.12 | 92.68 | 0.98 | 5.81 | |
| MGSVM | 92 | 90 | 92.5 | 75 | 0.96 | 5.11 | |
| KNN | FKNN | 98 | 95 | 98.75 | 95 | 0.97 | 4.94 |
| MKNN | 96.5 | 92.5 | 97.5 | 90.24 | 0.98 | 3.96 | |
| Cosine | 96 | 92.5 | 96.87 | 88.09 | 0.99 | 4.65 | |
| Cubic | 98 | 95 | 98.75 | 95 | 0.98 | 5.78 | |
| WKNN | 94 | 97.5 | 93.12 | 78 | 0.99 | 4.15 | |
| YOLO | Proposed Method | 99 | 97.5 | 99.37 | 97.5 | 0.99 | 2.63 |