Skip to main content
. 2021 Apr 13;7:e433. doi: 10.7717/peerj-cs.433

Table 7. Analysis of proposed approach (MuLeHyABSC) for different approaches on testing model STS.

The bold emphasis shows the highest results achieved by the proposed approach.

Sr No. Approach Features Accuracy (%) Precision Recall F-score
1 MuLeHyABSC+MLP POS tags + unigram 84.72 0.851 0.847 0.848
2 MuLeHyABSC+SVC POS tags + unigram 80.55 0.812 0.805 0.808
3 MuLeHyABSC+LR POS tags + unigram 79.16 0.802 0.791 0.796
4 MuLeHyABSC+DT POS tags + unigram 80.55 0.812 0.805 0.808
5 MuLeHyABSC+KN POS tags + unigram 76.16 0.772 0.761 0.766
6 MuLeHyABSC+RF POS tags + unigram 79.16 0.802 0.791 0.796
7 MuLeHyABSC+AB POS tags + unigram 80.55 0.812 0.805 0.808
8 MuLeHyABSC+ETC POS tags + unigram 72.55 0.732 0.725 0.728
9 MuLeHyABSC+GB POS tags + unigram 80.55 0.812 0.805 0.808
10 MuLeHyABSC+NB POS tags + unigram 66.66 0.683 0.666 0.674