## 4 Experimental Results
of Features**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Performance Metrics (Accuracy)/Classifier**} \\ \cline{3-7}  & & & **NB** & **DT** & **LR** & **KNN** \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{**Heuristics Method**} & GA & 9 & 79.38 & 80.93 & **82.99** & 74.74 \\  & BAT & 17 & 78.87 & 80.41 & 81.44 & 77.84 \\  & PSO & 6 & 80.41 & 80.93 & 81.44 & 78.87 \\  & FS & 12 & 80.41 & 78.87 & 82.47 & 75.26 \\  & AS & 13 & 79.38 & 80.93 & 81.96 & 76.29 \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{**Exhaustive Method**} & GSS & 6 & 79.90 & 80.41 & 81.96 & 78.87 \\  & BF & 5 & 80.93 & 80.93 & 81.96 & 77.32 \\ \hline \multicolumn{7}{c}{Average} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{79.90} & 80.49 & **82.03** & 77.03 \\ \hline \multicolumn{7}{c}{**FITTER-BASED FEATURE RANKING METHODS (FFR)**} \\ \hline \hline \multicolumn{7}{c}{**FITTER-BASED FEATURE RANKING METHODS (FFR)**} \\ \hline \hline \multirow{3}{*}{**Attribute Evaluator**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Search Methods**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**No. of Features**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Performance Metrics (Accuracy)/Classifier**} \\ \cline{3-7}  & & & **NB** & **DT** & **LR** & **KNN** \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{**Attribute Evaluator**} & GA & 8 & 84.4 & 89.6 & 90 & 84 \\  & BAT & 9 & 86 & 90.4 & **91.2** & 84.4 \\  & PSO & 7 & 84.8 & 89.2 & 89.6 & 84 \\  & PSO & 7 & 84.8 & 88.2 & 89.6 & 84 \\  & FS & 9 & 84.8 & 88.4 & 90.4 & 86.8 \\  & AS & 7 & 85.2 & 89.6 & 88.8 & 82 \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{**Exhaustive Method**} & GSS & 6 & 84.4 & 89.2 & 90 & 84 \\  & BF & 7 & 84.8 & 89.6 & 89.2 & 82.8 \\ \hline \multicolumn{7}{c}{**FITTER-BASED FEATURE RANKING METHODS (FFR)**} \\ \hline \hline \multirow{3}{*}{**Attribute Evaluator**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Search Methods**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**No. of Features**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Performance Metrics (Accuracy)/Classifier**} \\ \cline{3-7}  & & & **NB** & **DT** & **LR** & **KNN** \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{**Attribute Evaluator**} & GA & 8 & 84.4 & 89.6 & 90 & 84 \\  & BAT & 9 & 86 & 90.4 & **91.2** & 84.4 \\  & PSO & 7 & 84.8 & 89.2 & 89.6 & 84 \\  & PSO & 7 & 84.8 & 89.2 & 89.6 & 84 \\  & AS & 13 & 83.6 & 89.2 & 90.4 & 83.6 \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{**Exhaustive Method**} & GSS & 6 & 86 & **91.6** & 89.6 & 85.6 \\  & BF & 9 & 84.4 & 89.6 & 90.4 & 84.4 \\ \hline \multicolumn{7}{c}{Average} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{84.63} & 89.54 & **90.17** & 83.89 \\ \hline \multicolumn{7}{c}{**FITTER-BASED FEATURE RANKING METHODS (FFR)**} \\ \hline \hline \multicolumn{7}{c}{**FITTER-BASED FEATURE RANKING METHODS (FFR)**} \\ \hline \hline \multirow{3}{*}{**Attribute Evaluator**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Search Methods**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**No. of Features**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Performance Metrics (Accuracy)/Classifier**} \\ \cline{3-7}  & & & **NB** & **DT** & **LR** & **KNN** \\ \hline \hline \multirow{3}{*}{**Attribute Evaluator**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Search Methods**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**No. of Features**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Performance Metrics (Accuracy)/Classifier**} \\ \cline{3-7}  & & & **NB** & **DT** & **LR** & **KNN** \\ \hline \hline \multirow{3}{*}{**Heuristics Method**} & GA & 9 & 79.38 & 80.93 & **82.99** & 74.74 \\  & BAT & 17 & 78.87 & 80.41 & 81.44 & 77.84 \\ \cline{1-1}  & PSO & 6 & 80.41 & 80.93 & 81.44 & 78.87 \\ \cline{1-1}  & FS & 12 & 80.41 & 78.87 & 82.47 & 75.26 \\ \cline{1-1}  & AS & 13 & 79.38 & 80.93 & 81.96 & 76.29 \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{**Exhaustive Method**} & GSS & 6 & 79.90 & 80.41 & 81.96 & 78.87 \\ \cline{1-1}  & BF & 5 & 80.93 & 80.93 & 81.96 & 77.32 \\ \hline \multicolumn{7}{c}{**FITTER-BASED FEATURE RANKING METHODS (FFR)**} \\ \hline \hline \multicolumn{7}{c}{**FITTER-BASED FEATURE RANKING METHODS (FFR)**} \\ \hline \hline \multicolumn{7}{c}{**FITTER-BASED FEATURE RANKING METHODS (FFR)**} \\ \hline \hline \multirow{3}{*}{**Attribute Evaluator**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Search Methods**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**No. of Features**} & \mulFrom the aforementioned results, it is clear that there is no significant difference in the performance accuracy values of the FS methods.