Table 14 Performance evaluation of the proposed MCAM model in three randomized experiments on testing datasets. The best-achieved values are in bold, while the second-highest values are underlined. The top values are individually highlighted in bold and underlined for normal and abnormal categories. [Values in %].

Channel			Class	1st Experiment			2nd Experiment			3rd Experiment			Avg. Acc
MGIC	SIC	MSIC		Sens	Spec	F1	Sens	Spec	F1	Sens	Spec	F1
SE	SimAM	ECA	N	98.96	98.14	98.36	98.24	98.57	98.69	98.65	98.67	98.78
SE	SimAM	ECA	A	98.52	98.27	98.11	98.67	98.42	98.57	98.35	98.24	98.77	98.84 ± 0.36
ECA	CBAM	SE	N	98.12	98.51	98.35	98.34	98.62	98.47	98.62	98.15	98.24
ECA	CBAM	SE	A	98.32	98.27	98.47	98.14	98.13	98.17	98.25	98.47	98.31	98.51 ± 0.11
SRM	CBAM	SRM	N	99.21	99.67	99.78	98.67	98.25	98.32	98.74	98.54	98.54
SRM	CBAM	SRM	A	99.42	99.58	99.39	98.99	98.87	98.92	98.75	98.68	98.76	98.28 ± 0.31
SRM	CBAM	SE	N	99.21	99.67	99.78	98.67	98.25	98.32	98.62	98.54	98.69
SRM	CBAM	SE	A	99.08	99.27	99.67	98.80	98.32	98.58	98.79	98.99	98.90	98.10 ± 0.27
ECA	CBAM	SRM	N	99.42	99.58	99.39	98.87	98.72	99.02	98.75	98.68	98.76
ECA	CBAM	SRM	A	99.75	99.28	99.63	98.80	98.82	98.58	98.79	98.99	98.90	98.39 ± 0.20

Quick links

Search