Table 5.

Performance of Latent Semantic Analysis method (instead of using the developed approach) using MRI dataset (Unit %).

Illnesses	FS	MN	GL	VD	CA	HY	CC	MA	CS	MI	AD	CT	ME	PD	SR	AL	CJ	MB	AV	MS	LE	HE	CH	HD	NB
FS	65	0	2	2	0	1	2	4	0	2	1	2	1	4	0	2	2	2	1	0	2	2	2	0	1
MN	2	66	1	0	2	2	0	1	2	2	0	1	2	2	2	0	4	1	2	2	2	0	1	3	0
GL	1	2	71	2	1	0	2	2	1	0	2	1	1	4	0	2	1	0	1	0	2	2	0	0	2
VD	0	1	2	69	2	2	1	0	2	1	0	4	2	1	2	0	2	2	2	1	1	0	2	1	0
CA	2	2	3	1	67	0	0	2	1	3	2	1	0	0	1	3	1	1	2	1	0	2	1	2	2
HY	3	1	2	1	1	64	2	1	1	2	4	0	1	2	0	0	0	2	1	2	1	2	3	1	3
CC	4	0	1	3	2	4	60	0	2	0	2	3	2	2	1	2	1	3	2	0	2	0	1	2	1
MA	0	2	2	1	0	2	4	61	1	3	2	0	1	2	2	3	2	0	2	2	1	2	2	0	4
CS	2	1	0	2	2	1	0	2	67	2	0	1	2	1	2	0	1	2	2	2	3	0	1	2	2
MI	1	2	2	1	2	0	2	1	2	69	2	0	1	2	0	2	2	0	1	2	1	2	0	1	2
AD	2	1	1	0	1	2	0	2	0	2	72	1	0	2	2	1	0	2	2	0	2	2	2	1	0
CT	0	2	2	1	2	0	2	1	2	0	1	73	2	0	1	2	2	1	2	1	0	1	0	2	0
ME	1	0	1	2	0	2	1	0	1	2	2	2	75	1	2	0	1	2	0	2	1	0	1	0	1
PD	0	1	0	1	2	1	0	2	0	1	0	1	0	77	1	2	2	0	1	1	2	1	0	2	2
SR	2	1	2	0	1	0	2	0	1	0	2	0	1	0	78	1	0	1	2	2	0	2	1	1	0
AL	1	2	1	2	0	2	1	2	2	2	0	1	0	2	1	71	2	2	0	1	2	1	0	2	1
CJ	2	0	2	1	2	4	0	1	2	1	2	2	2	1	3	0	63	1	2	2	1	2	2	0	2
MB	3	2	2	4	1	0	2	2	1	1	3	0	1	2	0	1	1	61	2	3	1	0	2	3	2
AV	2	3	2	0	1	2	3	0	2	0	2	1	4	0	3	2	0	5	60	0	2	2	1	3	0
MS	0	2	2	1	1	2	5	3	0	2	2	2	1	3	4	0	3	2	0	59	2	1	2	0	1
LE	1	1	1	0	2	1	2	0	3	1	0	0	2	1	0	2	1	2	4	0	71	2	0	1	2
HE	3	2	0	0	0	1	2	2	3	1	1	0	1	1	0	0	0	2	1	3	1	73	2	1	0
CH	0	1	3	1	1	2	0	1	0	1	0	1	0	2	2	2	1	2	3	1	0	0	74	1	1
HD	2	2	0	0	3	1	1	1	0	0	2	0	1	0	0	0	2	4	0	0	1	1	1	76	2
NB	1	1	1	2	2	0	0	0	1	1	2	0	0	1	1	0	0	0	1	1	2	2	1	2	78
Average	68.80%