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 |