## 3 Proposed Model
The average accuracy is measured on dropout rates ranging from 0.01 to 0.10 for an embedding size of 200. Model M01 exhibits the lowest accuracy rate of 61.45% for the 0.01 dropout rate and the highest average accuracy rate of 71.38% for the 0.10 dropout rate. Model M02 has the lowest average accuracy rate of 61.65% for the dropout rate of 0.06 and the highest average accuracy rate of 73.17% for the dropout rate of 0.04. For models M03, M04, M05, and M06, the lowest observed performance results are 60.96% for a dropout rate of 0.09, 69.08% for a 0.08 dropout rate, 80.98% for a dropout rate of 0.10, and 81.90% for a dropout rate of 0.01, respectively. The highest accuracy rates achieved for these models are 75.11% for M03 using a dropout rate of 0.10, 85.05% for M04 on a dropout rate of 0.10, and 86.24% for M05 using a dropout rate of 0.09, while for M06, the highest average accuracy can be observed for a dropout rate of 0.10, with 88.63%. The highest average performance rate for model M07 can be observed for a dropout rate of 0.09%, with an accuracy rate of 92.89%, whereas the lowest average accuracy rate of 84.60% can be observed with a floor dropout rate of 0.01%. The performance of the proposed model is the highest among all models, with the lowest average accuracy rate of 91.53% for a dropout rate of 0.02, whereas the highest accuracy rate of 96.21% can be observed for a dropout rate of 0.04. In Table 8, the observations clearly show that the proposed model performs much better and is more consistent for all dropout rates as compared to the other eight models. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline  & \multicolumn{4}{c}{Dropout = 0.10} \\ \hline M01 & 67.25 & 68.32 & 69.11 \\ \hline M02 & 70.22 & 71.66 & 69.21 \\ \hline M03 & 72.35 & 74.31 & 71.33 \\ \hline M04 & 77.55 & 76.32 & 79.65 \\ \hline M05 & 80.32 & 79.55 & 80.11 \\ \hline M06 & 83.35 & 84.22 & 85.21 \\ \hline M07 & 88.66 & 87.32 & 86.21 \\ \hline M08 & 90.32 & 90.11 & 90.56 \\ \hline M09 & 94.21 & 96.21 & 91.56 \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 7: _Cont._ \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline  & \multicolumn{4}{c}{Dropout} \\ \hline
**Models** & **0.01** & **0.02** & **0.03** & **0.04** & **0.05** & **0.06** & **0.07** & **0.08** & **0.09** & **0.1** \\ \hline M01 & 61.45 & 63.60 & 64.22 & 70.17 & 66.46 & 62.44 & 64.23 & 64.54 & 62.43 & 71.38 \\ \hline M02 & 65.97 & 62.56 & 62.36 & 73.17 & 68.34 & 61.65 & 64.89 & 67.72 & 67.15 & 68.91 \\ \hline M03 & 69.18 & 68.78 & 65.30 & 74.09 & 61.61 & 66.53 & 62.94 & 74.94 & 60.96 & 75.11 \\ \hline M04 & 72.28 & 71.43 & 70.40 & 77.80 & 69.34 & 70.27 & 72.19 & 69.08 & 75.44 & 85.05 \\ \hline M05 & 82.14 & 81.50 & 83.17 & 83.30 & 84.22 & 84.58 & 84.31 & 85.26 & 86.24 & 80.98 \\ \hline M06 & 81.90 & 82.25 & 85.79 & 86.21 & 81.63 & 84.57 & 81.91 & 87.86 & 82.79 & 88.63 \\ \hline M07 & 84.60 & 85.34 & 90.40 & 90.89 & 90.63 & 90.25 & 86.98 & 86.28 & 92.89 & 88.92 \\ \hline M08 & 86.92 & 88.73 & 85.63 & 92.25 & 87.98 & 86.30 & 84.77 & 89.67 & 91.33 & 91.77 \\ \hline M09 & 92.40 & 91.53 & 95.55 & 96.21 & 94.53 & 95.42 & 91.88 & 92.47 & 94.18 & 95.42 \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 8: Average classification accuracy (%) results for an embedding size of 200.