Table 8.
Results of Wilcoxon signed-rank paired sampled test between the presented TextConvoNet_6, TextConvoNet_4, and other techniques/models (* showing the groups with the statistically significant difference)
| Comparison Group | P-value | Effect r | Comparison Group | P-value | Effect r | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TextConvoNet_6 (Two-tailed) Vs. | TextConvoNet_4 | 3.36E-05* | 0.463 | TextConvoNet_4 (Two-tailed) Vs. | Yoonkim | 0.00017* | 0.419 |
| Yoonkim | 1.63E-07* | 0.585 | LSTM | 3.36E-05* | 0.463 | ||
| LSTM | 4.66E-08* | 0.61 | VDCNN | 6.75E-07* | 0.55 | ||
| VDCNN | 2.77E-07* | 0.574 | CLSTM | 1.83E-05* | 0.479 | ||
| CLSTM | 5.47E-08* | 0.607 | MNB | 0.00039* | 0.395 | ||
| MNB | 1.72E-06* | 0.534 | RF | 4.66E-08* | 0.61 | ||
| RF | 6.40E-08* | 0.604 | DT | 6.50E-09* | 0.648 | ||
| DT | 6.50E-09* | 0.648 | SVC | 1.22E-05* | 0.489 | ||
| SVC | 1.76E-07 | 0.83 | GBC | 1.29E-07* | 0.59 | ||
| GBC | 1.76E-07* | 0.583 | KNN | 9.89E-09* | 0.64 | ||
| KNN | 1.07E-08* | 0.639 | XGBoost | 5.82E-05* | 0.449 | ||
| XGBoost | 1.20E-07 | 0.591 | BiLSTM + Attention | 8.79E-05* | 0.438 | ||
| BiLSTM + Attention | 1.29E-08* | 0.635 | BERT | 1.37E-08* | 0.634 | ||
| BERT | 1.37E-08 | 0.634 | HAN | 1.50E-07* | 0.587 | ||
| HAN | 1.16E-08* | 0.638 | BerConvoNet | 0.055 | 0.178 | ||
| BerConvoNet | 0.00011* | 0.412 | CNN-BiLSTM | 0.070 | 0.164 | ||
| CNN-BiLSTM | 1.05E-06* | 0.53 | TLGNN | 4.66E-09* | 0.64 | ||
| TLGNN | 4.66E-09* | 0.642 | SeqGNN | 1.73E-05* | 0.462 | ||
| SeqGNN | 3.8E-06* | 0.50 |
*MNB= Multinomial Naïve Bayes, RF= Random Forest, DT= Decision Tree, SVC= Support Vector Classifier, GBC= Gradient Boosting Classifier