TABLE 4.
Performance comparison on Check390.
| Method | Sn(%) | Sp(%) | ACC(%) | Str (%) | MCC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IGPCR-Drug Xiao et al. (2013) | 80.8 | 66.9 | 71.6 | 73.9 | 0.45 |
| OET-KNN Hu et al. (2016) | 67.7 | 84.2 | 78.7 | 76.9 | 0.52 |
| QuickRBF Hu et al. (2016) | 76.2 | 77.7 | 77.2 | 77.6 | 0.52 |
| SVM Hu et al. (2016) | 76.2 | 78.9 | 78.0 | 77.6 | 0.53 |
| RF Hu et al. (2016) | 78.5 | 78.1 | 78.2 | 78.3 | 0.54 |
| RF + PPP Hu et al. (2016) | 83.1 | 79.6 | 80.8 | 81.3 | 0.60 |
| DWKNN Wang et al. (2020) | 83.9 | 80.0 | 81.3 | 81.9 | 0.61 |
| DWKNN(Ensemble) Wang et al. (2020) | 83.1 | 82.7 | 82.8 | 82.9 | 0.63 |
| BOW-GBDT Qiu et al. (2021) | 80.0 | 90.0 | 86.7 | 85.0 | 0.70 |
| Our method | 87.1 | 89.4 | 88.4 | 88.3 | 0.76 |
The best results for each metric are in bold.