Skip to main content

Table 8 RMSE performance of different wrapper methods on the real studies for test data

From: Artificial Intelligence based wrapper for high dimensional feature selection

Methods

Performance (RMSE)

Marginal Model Scenarios

I

II

III

IV

Mean (95% Confidence Interval)

ALASSO

0.95

(0.95–0.96)

3.76

(3.67–3.84)

3.08

(3.01–3.14)

0.86

(0.81–0.90)

LASSO

0.96

(0.95–0.97)

3.75

(3.65–3.85)

3.10

(3.03–3.16)

0.84

(0.8–0.87)

SPLS

0.97

(0.95–0.99)

3.61

(3.54–3.69)

3.35

(3.03–3.66)

0.77

(0.76–0.79)

Enet

0.95

(0.94–0.96)

3.79

(3.7–3.87)

3.15

(3.08–3.23)

0.85

(0.81–0.90)

AEnet

0.96

(0.94–0.97)

3.76

(3.67–3.85)

3.11

(3.07–3.15)

0.84

(0.8–0.87)

AIWRAP-L

0.94

(0.93–0.94)

3.65

(3.59–3.71)

3.02

(2.98–3.06)

0.83

(0.8–0.86)

AIWRAP-LLr

0.96

(0.94–0.97)

3.59

(3.55–3.64)

2.97

(2.91–3.03)

0.75

(0.73–0.78)

AIWRAP-LR

0.95

(0.94–0.96)

3.80

(3.72–3.87)

3.19

(3.11–3.28)

1.20

(1.17–1.24)

Methods

Interaction Model Scenarios

I

II

III

IV

Mean (95% Confidence Interval)

ALASSO

0.94

(0.93–0.95)

3.69

(3.61–3.76)

3.12

(3.02–3.23)

0.52

(0.49–0.55)

GLASSO

1.44

(1.2–1.68)

4.46

(4.35–4.57)

8.24

(5.37–11.11)

0.31

(0.28–0.34)

LASSO

0.95

(0.94–0.96)

3.74

(3.67–3.81)

3.15

(3.02–3.27)

0.43

(0.39–0.47)

SPLS

1.03

(0.91–1.15)

3.81

(3.76–3.86)

4.34

(3.26–5.42)

0.24

(0.22–0.26)

Enet

0.94

(0.93–0.95)

3.78

(3.72–3.84)

3.24

(3.13–3.34)

0.44

(0.4–0.48)

AEnet

0.93

(0.92–0.94)

3.73

(3.65–3.81)

3.14

(3.06–3.21)

0.53

(0.5–0.56)

AIWRAP-L

0.94

(0.92–0.95)

3.58

(3.53–3.63)

3.07

(2.98–3.17)

0.29

(0.26–0.33)

AIWRAP-LLr

1.04

(0.99–1.1)

3.76

(3.58–3.93)

3.65

(3.26–4.04)

0.26

(0.21–0.31)

AIWRAP-LR

0.93

(0.92–0.94)

3.70

(3.64–3.76)

3.22

(3.18–3.26)

1.11

(0.99–1.24)

  1. Values in Bold means best results