Skip to main content

Table 1 Comparison of performance accuracies, as percentage of samples correctly classified, for classification of canine articular cartilage data for seven different machine-learning methods, using leave-one-out cross-validation

From: Analysis of mass spectrometry data from the secretome of an explant model of articular cartilage exposed to pro-inflammatory and anti-inflammatory stimuli using machine learning

Dataseter

Naive Bayes

SVM

k-nearest neighbour

JRip (rule based)

Random forest

C4.5

BioHEL

ProteinProphet

39.1

52.2

34.8

43.5

34.8

52.2

73.9

emPAI

52.2

56.5

52.2

78.3

39.1

73.9

56.5

ProteinProphet and emPAI combined

52.2

52.2

43.5

78.3

26.1

47.8

78.3

  1. For the ‘ProteinProphet and emPAI combined’ the two scores were combined into one dataset. The highest accuracies achieved in each dataset are shown in bold.