Table 7 Results of the nine error metrics across 16 cases.

From: Evaluation of liquefaction potential in central Taiwan using random forest method

Case

R2

RMSE

VAF

PI

MAE

WI

WMAPE

NS

AIC

1

0.90

1.60 × 10–1

89.21

1.63

5.11 × 10–2

0.97

9.62 × 10–2

0.89

-579.4

2

0.88

1.74 × 10–1

87.04

1.57

8.00 × 10–2

0.97

1.73 × 10–1

0.87

-554.2

3

0.86

1.90 × 10–1

84.03

1.5

6.42 × 10–2

0.96

1.39 × 10–1

0.84

-525.9

4

0.88

1.74 × 10–1

87.7

1.58

8.91 × 10–2

0.97

1.90 × 10–1

0.88

-554.8

5

0.80

2.30 × 10–1

76.85

1.33

9.94 × 10–2

0.94

2.15 × 10–1

0.76

-464.4

6

0.86

1.91 × 10–1

84.81

1.51

5.26 × 10–2

0.96

1.12 × 10–1

0.85

-525

7

0.76

2.55 × 10–1

73.84

1.24

7.27 × 10–2

0.93

1.44 × 10–1

0.73

-433.1

8

0.87

1.76 × 10–1

87.29

1.57

9.40 × 10–2

0.97

2.00 × 10–1

0.87

-553.7

9

0.77

2.69 × 10–1

76.44

1.26

1.38 × 10–1

0.93

2.97 × 10–1

0.75

-415.9

10

0.78

2.44 × 10–1

75.85

1.29

7.08 × 10–2

0.94

1.40 × 10–1

0.75

-447.6

11

0.76

2.55 × 10–1

72.73

1.22

8.43 × 10–2

0.93

1.67 × 10–1

0.72

-432.8

12

0.77

2.43 × 10–1

74.73

1.27

8.82 × 10–2

0.94

1.91 × 10–1

0.75

-448.8

13

0.77

2.46 × 10–1

73.93

1.26

8.59 × 10–2

0.94

1.70 × 10–1

0.73

-444.9

14

0.77

2.41 × 10–1

74.65

1.27

1.05 × 10–1

0.94

2.23 × 10–1

0.75

-451

15

0.74

2.59 × 10–1

70.66

1.18

1.02 × 10–1

0.93

2.21 × 10–1

0.7

-428

16

0.70

2.85 × 10–1

66.71

1.07

1.99 × 10–1

0.91

4.31 × 10–1

0.66

-396.9