## 6 Results  
In this study, the statistical test utilized was the Wilcoxon rank-sum test, proposed by [PERSON] [33]. This test is a nonparametric method employed to compare two independent groups. It evaluates differences between the two groups on a single ordinal variable, without requiring any specific distribution. We conducted 30 independent runs (samples) and subsequently employed the Wilcoxon rank-sum test to compare the performance of the two techniques using the selected evaluation metrics. The experimental outcomes, presented in Tables 5-8, encompass the average and standard deviation of all evaluation metrics across 30 independent runs. Superior results are highlighted in bold for clarity. Additionally, the SSD column indicates whether a significant statistical difference exists between the compared methods. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Dataset** & **Evaluation Metric** & **GA** & **GA std** & **FbQGA** & **FbQGA std** & **SSD** \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{Taiwan Bankruptcy} & F1 & 0.5242 & 4.26\% & **0.5886** & 1.17\% & **yes** \\ \cline{2-7}  & Precision & 0.511 & 1.79\% & **0.5663** & 1.23\% & **yes** \\ \cline{2-7}  & Recall & 0.5381 & 3.25\% & **0.6127** & 3.06\% & **yes** \\ \cline{2-7}  & Accuracy & 0.8489 & 4.98\% & **0.8961** & 4.50\% & **yes** \\ \cline{2-7}  & Avg. No. of Selected Features & 41.10 & 11.28\% & **31.52** & 23.12\% & **yes** \\ \cline{2-7}  & Running Time (s) & 50.92 & 7.82\% & **33.15** & 15.90\% & **yes** \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{Musk} & F1 & 0.6096 & 11.51\% & **0.6965** & 5.48\% & **yes** \\ \cline{2-7}  & Precision & 0.5795 & 5.48\% & **0.654** & 4.15\% & **yes** \\ \cline{2-7}  & Recall & 0.6431 & 7.21\% & **0.7031** & 6.37\% & **yes** \\ \cline{2-7}  & Accuracy & 0.6053 & 13.37\% & **0.7142** & 6.37\% & **yes** \\ \cline{2-7}  & Avg. No. of Selected Features & 61.35 & 14.60\% & **22.13** & 24.97\% & **yes** \\ \cline{2-7}  & Running Time (s) & 347.33 & 3.16\% & **215.46** & 15.83\% & **yes** \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{Parkinson’s Disease} & F1 & 0.6553 & 2.66\% & **0.7031** & 2.74\% & **yes** \\ \cline{2-7}  & Precision & 0.6481 & 2.56\% & **0.6872** & 2.34\% & **yes** \\ \cline{2-7}  & Recall & 0.6627 & 2.79\% & **0.7731** & 2.72\% & **yes** \\ \cline{2-7}  & Accuracy & 0.7269 & 1.89\% & **0.745** & 2.67\% & **yes** \\ \cline{2-7}  & Avg. No. of Selected Features & 367.20 & 2.96\% & **236.91** & 25.24\% & **yes** \\ \cline{2-7}  & Running Time (s) & 143.87 & 2.53\% & **80.11** & 16.05\% & **yes** \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{Backdoor} & F1 & 0.7918 & 3.13\% & **0.8422** & 1.94\% & **yes** \\ \cline{2-7}  & Precision & 0.9105 & 4.33\% & **0.9205** & 5.10\% & no \\ \cline{2-7}  & Recall & 0.7005 & 4.48\% & **0.7762** & 2.08\% & **yes** \\ \cline{2-7}  & Accuracy & 0.9462 & 1.62\% & **0.9547** & 2.20\% & no \\ \cline{2-7}  & Avg. No. of Selected Features & 31.00 & 8.71\% & **12.50** & 3.78\% & **yes** \\ \cline{2-7}  & Running Time (s) & 563.83 & 15.61\% & **212.35** & 23.96\% & **yes** \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{Campaign} & F1 & 0.6568 & 2.27\% & **0.6934** & 1.96\% & **yes** \\ \cline{2-7}  & Precision & 0.6418 & 2.26\% & **0.6826** & 1.63\% & **yes** \\ \cline{2-7}  & Recall & 0.6861 & 2.84\% & **0.7046** & 3.18\% & no \\ \cline{2-7}  & Accuracy & 0.8408 & 1.83\% & **0.8733** & 1.20\% & **yes** \\ \cline{2-7}  & Avg. No. of Selected Features & 18.00 & 4.71\% & **10.70** & 4.32\% & **yes** \\ \cline{2-7}  & Running Time (s) & 150.94 & 6.96\% & **92.83** & 16.06\% & **yes** \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 5: Comparison of GA and FbQGA (std: standard deviation; SSD: Significant Statistical Differences; the best performance is highlighted in “Bold”).