Table 6.

Comparison of the Configuration Results.

Configuration Number	Instance Number	Batch Size	C	Filter Type	Kernel	Regression Optimizer	Observed Ranking	Predicted Ranking
1	88	100	1.0	Normalization	PolyKernel	RegSMOOptimized	0.0	~0.02
2	121	100	1.0	Normalization	PolyKernel	RegSMOOptimized	0.0	~−0.09
3	71	100	1.0	Normalization	PolyKernel	RegSMOOptimized	0.0	~−0.21
4	287	100	1.0	Normalization	PolyKernel	RegSMOOptimized	1.0	~0.67
5	212	100	1.0	Normalization	PolyKernel	RegSMOOptimized	1.0	~0.68
6	113	100	1.0	Normalization	PolyKernel	RegSMOOptimized	1.0	~0.65
7	426	100	1.0	Normalization	PolyKernel	RegSMOOptimized	2.0	~1.85
8	315	100	1.0	Normalization	PolyKernel	RegSMOOptimized	2.0	~1.80
9	270	100	1.0	Normalization	PolyKernel	RegSMOOptimized	2.0	~1.65
10	89	100	1.0	Normalization	PolyKernel	RegSMOOptimized	3.0	~2.77
----------------------------------------------------
11	46	100	1.0	Normalization	PolyKernel	RegSMOOptimized	3.0	~2.84
12	3	100	1.0	Normalization	PolyKernel	RegSMOOptimized	3.0	~2.74
13	251	100	1.0	Normalization	PolyKernel	RegSMOOptimized	4.0	~3.56
14	217	100	1.0	Normalization	PolyKernel	RegSMOOptimized	4.0	~3.85
15	164	100	1.0	Normalization	PolyKernel	RegSMOOptimized	4.0	~3.95
16	10	100	1.0	Normalization	PolyKernel	RegSMOOptimized	5.0	~5.19
17	39	100	1.0	Normalization	PolyKernel	RegSMOOptimized	5.0	~5.43
18	63	100	1.0	Normalization	PolyKernel	RegSMOOptimized	5.0	~5.19
19	9	100	1.0	Normalization	PolyKernel	RegSMOOptimized	6.0	~5.64
20	28	100	1.0	Normalization	PolyKernel	RegSMOOptimized	6.0	~5.78
21	47	100	1.0	Normalization	PolyKernel	RegSMOOptimized	6.0	~5.76