Skip to main content

Table 12 Comparison between a single C4.5 tree and descriptive forest for CVD-dataset accuracy, precision, and recall

From: Descriptive forest: experiments on a novel tree-structure-generalization method for describing cardiovascular diseases

Comparison

the single C4.5 tree

the {Oldpeak > 85}-tree

the {ChestPainType = ASY}-tree

the {ExerciseAngina = Y}-tree

the {ST_Slope = Flat}-tree

the {Sex = M}-tree

the {Sex = M, ChestPainType = ASY}-tree

the {Sex = M, ExerciseAngina = Y}-tree

the {Sex = M, ST_Slope = Flat}-tree

the Descriptive Forest

-True positive

459

316

367

311

377

4

330

285

339

470

-True negative

328

47

60

14

28

154

47

10

15

333

-False positive

82

44

44

41

51

2

26

29

28

77

-False negative

49

16

25

5

4

14

23

4

3

38

-Number of instances of the training dataset

918

423

496

371

460

174

426

328

385

918

-Correctness I (accuracy)

0.8573

0.8582

0.8609

0.8760

0.8804

0.9080

0.8850

0.8994

0.9195

0.8747

-Correctness II (precision)

0.8484

0.8778

0.8929

0.8835

0.8808

0.6667

0.9270

0.9076

0.9237

0.8592

-Coverage (recall)

0.9035

0.9518

0.9362

0.9842

0.9895

0.2222

0.9348

0.9862

0.9912

0.9252

-Overall quality (F-measure)

0.8751

0.9133

0.9141

0.9311

0.9320

0.3333

0.9309

0.9453

0.9563

0.8910

-Not predict

0

495

422

547

458

744

492

590

533

0