Table 4. Performance comparison of our proposed method with existing works in SVEB and VEB classes.
| Methods | SVEB | VEB | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PPV (%) | SE (%) | F1 (%) | Accuracy (%) | PPV (%) | SE (%) | F1 (%) | Accuracy (%) | |
| De Chazal, O’Dwyer & Reilly (2004) | 38.53 | 75.98 | 51.13 | 94.61 | 81.67 | 80.31 | 80.98 | 97.62 |
| Chen et al. (2017) | 38.40 | 29.50 | 33.36 | 95.34 | 85.25 | 70.85 | 77.38 | 97.32 |
| Zhang et al. (2014) | 35.98 | 79.06 | 49.46 | 93.33 | 92.75 | 85.48 | 88.96 | 98.63 |
| Mar et al. (2011) | 33.53 | 83.22 | 47.80 | 93.28 | 75.89 | 86.75 | 80.96 | 97.35 |
| Liu et al. (2019) | 39.87 | 33.12 | 36.18 | 95.49 | 76.51 | 90.20 | 82.79 | 97.45 |
| Garcia et al. (2017) | 53.00 | 62.00 | 57.15 | – | 59.40 | 87.30 | 70.70 | – |
| Our proposed method | 68.34 | 81.37 | 74.29 | 97.92 | 91.12 | 93.72 | 92.40 | 99.00 |