Table 2 Compression of imbalanced data handling techniques using accuracy and AUC values.

From: Employing machine learning techniques for prediction of micronutrient supplementation status during pregnancy in East African Countries

Algorithms

Comparison method

Unbalanced

data

Under-sampling

Over-sampling

ADASYN

SMOTE

SVM

Accuracy (%)

65.0%

69.0%

74.0%

66.0%

72.0%

AUC

0.508

0.600

0.529

0.513

0.491

Gaussian naive baye

Accuracy (%)

59.0%

60.0%

67.0%

59.0%

68.0%

AUC

0.660

0.668

0.691

0.632

0.669

Logistic regression

Accuracy (%)

64.0%

71.0%

73.0%

60.0%

72.0%

AUC

0.684

0.703

0.703

0.657

0.698

Decision tree classifier

Accuracy (%)

56.0%

65.0%

70.0%

77.0%

88.0%

AUC

0.467

0.504

0.467

0.825

0.829

Random forest classifier

Accuracy (%)

60.0%

71.0%

76.0%

88.0%

91.0%

AUC

0.635

0.656

0.635

0.853

0.878

Gradient boosting classifier

Accuracy (%)

67.0%

76.0%

73.0%

87.0%

87.0%

AUC

0.639

0.636

0.639

0.728

0.748

XGBoost

Accuracy (%)

66.0%

69.0%

73.0%

76.0%

78.0%

AUC

0.565

0.594

0.577

0.626

0.637

KNN

Accuracy (%)

61.0%

68.0%

71.0%

69.0%

88.0%

AUC

0.606

0.632

0.613

0.784

0.815