Table 9.
Comparison of proposed works with LAG –LDA and other works on AR dataset
| Method | Illumination variation (S1) | Expression change (S2) | Scarves-Illumination(S4) | Sunglasses-Illumination (S5) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LAG-LDA | 90.67 (Exp 6) | 93.25 (Exp 1) | 73.33 (Exp 8) | 92 (Exp 7) |
| Symbolic approach + PFFT | 98.54 | 98.81 | 89.79 | 95.08 |
| Symbolic approach + DGM | 91.67 | 95.24 | 93.03 | 98.21 |
| Symbolic approach + SGEF | 96.46 | 97.14 | 94.67 | 83.92 |
| Symbolic approach + GSGEF | 96.46 | 95.48 | 95.90 | 87.50 |
| NN + PFFT | 100 | 100 | 98.98 | 85.25 |
| NN + DG | 91.88 | 96.91 | 94.26 | 42.86 |
| NN + SGEF | 97.71 | 98.33 | 97.95 | 91.07 |
| NN + GSGEF | 92.29 | 94.29 | 95.49 | 73.21 |
| SVM + PFFT | 99.58 | 99.52 | 90.82 | 94.67 |
| SVM + DG | 95.00 | 99.05 | 95.90 | 83.93 |
| SVM + SGEF | 95.42 | 96.90 | 92.62 | 80.36 |
| SVM + GSGEF | 89.90 | 92.86 | 91.39 | 69.64 |
| PNN + PFFT | 93.54 | 96.19 | 72.45 | 88.93 |
| PNN + DG | 96.04 | 95.00 | 93.44 | 55.35 |
| PNN + SGEF | 93.54 | 93.33 | 91.80 | 89.29 |
| PNN + GSGEF | 91.05 | 93.81 | 90.57 | 80.36 |
Bold values highlights the best recognition rate of proposed techniques compared to LAG-LDA