# Complement-Class Harmonized Naive Bayes Classifier
## 4 Experimental Setup and Results
### Comparison to State-of-the-Art (General Datasets)
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Dataset** & **CHNB** & **NB** & **FTNB** & **CAWWNB\({}^{\rm CLL}\)** & **CAVWMI** & **CAWNB\({}^{\rm CLL}\)** & **WANBI\({}^{\rm CLL}\)** & **FTANB** \\ \hline Anneal & 99.11 & 95.77 & \(\bullet\) & 98.00 & 99.23 & 97.62 & 98.60 & 98.00 & 97.97 \\ Anneal Orig & 98.22 & 95.99 & \(\bullet\) & 97.22 & 91.76 & \(\bullet\) & 89.84 & \(\bullet\) & 91.06 & \(\bullet\) & 90.89 & 91.55 & \(\bullet\) \\ Audiology & 76.17 & 72.23 & 73.40 & 77.02 & 75.78 & 82.10 & 78.08 & 75.81 & \\ Autes & 85.38 & 74.76 & \(\bullet\) & 82.45 & 75.94 & 68.38 & 75.08 & 74.98 & 70.00 & \\ Breast-cancer & 62.98 & 70.08 & \(\circ\) & 62.22 & 68.57 & 72.14 & 69.53 & 71.00 & 72.01 & \\ Breast-w & 96.57 & 97.28 & 96.71 & 96.07 & 97.28 & 96.20 & 96.88 & 97.14 & \\ Car & 93.23 & 85.24 & \(\bullet\) & 92.42 & 90.12 & 70.79 & 86.69 & 85.69 & \(\bullet\) & 89.52 & \\ Colic & 83.17 & 79.62 & 78.26 & 79.90 & 82.18 & 81.39 & 82.69 & 81.75 & \\ Colic-ORIC & 75.01 & 73.09 & 76.37 & 75.95 & 74.40 & 76.77 & 74.26 & 74.62 & 74.62 & \\ Credit-a & 84.93 & 86.09 & 84.06 & 81.44 & 86.01 & 85.28 & 85.29 & 84.41 & \\ Credit-g & 71.40 & 75.80 & \(\circ\) & 69.70 & 74.94 & 75.53 & 75.48 & 76.13 & 76.09 & \\ Cylinderands & 80.74 & 79.76 & 80.19 & 81.28 & 81.09 & 77.81 & 78.89 & 80.65 & \\ Diabetes & 75.12 & 76.95 & 73.70 & 75.14 & 75.32 & 75.88 & 76.15 & 76.22 & \\ Ecoli & 85.17 & 86.05 & 85.73 & 83.60 & 82.26 & 83.93 & 83.75 & 82.77 & \\ Glass & 75.22 & 74.31 & 75.69 & 59.41 & 58.70 & 59.06 & 59.87 & 58.29 & \\ Heart-c & 84.47 & 84.47 & 83.15 & 80.97 & 81.23 & 81.29 & 82.18 & 84.00 & \\ Heart-h & 85.75 & 84.39 & 83.32 & 82.15 & 82.79 & 83.34 & 84.22 & 83.45 & \\ Heart-stab & 84.44 & 83.33 & 82.59 & 81.78 & 82.30 & 82.26 & 82.96 & 83.78 & \\ Hepatitis & 87.79 & 87.83 & 87.08 & 83.09 & 85.86 & 84.95 & 84.35 & 85.16 & \\ Hypothyroid & 99.20 & 89.30 & \(\bullet\) & 99.18 & 93.50 & \(\bullet\) & 93.53 & \(\bullet\) & 93.58 & \(\bullet\) & 93.39 & \(\bullet\) \\ Ionosphere & 92.59 & 91.16 & 92.02 & 91.23 & 91.09 & 91.83 & 91.82 & 91.08 & \\ Iris & 96.67 & 96.67 & 96.00 & 95.33 & 93.67 & 96.47 & 96.60 & 95.53 & \\ KR-versus-KP & 97.21 & 87.0 & \(\bullet\) & 96.09 & 95.08 & 90.21 & 94.31 & 93.43 & \(\bullet\) & 94.70 & \\ Labor & 92.39 & 92.33 & 92.33 & 94.60 & 93.33 & 94.07 & 93.80 & 92.80 & \\ Letter & 84.40 & 74.11 & \(\bullet\) & 78.08 & \(\bullet\) & 77.64 & \(\bullet\) & 71.25 & \(\bullet\) & 68.42 & \(\bullet\) & 72.90 & \\ Lymphography & 84.52 & 85.24 & 82.38 & 84.05 & 83.67 & 82.37 & 84.09 & 83.95 & \\ Mushroom & 99.99 & 95.78 & \(\bullet\) & 99.93 & 99.82 & 97.07 & 99.80 & 99.69 & 99.85 & \\ Optdigits & 95.62 & 92.38 & \(\bullet\) & 95.00 & 95.08 & 92.48 & 95.62 & 93.94 & 94.68 & \\ Page-blocks & 96.73 & 93.59 & \(\bullet\) & 96.24 & 93.87 & \(\bullet\) & 92.32 & 93.16 & \(\bullet\) & 92.77 & 92.61 & \(\bullet\) \\ Pendigits & 96.32 & 87.97 & \(\bullet\) & 95.01 & \(\bullet\) & 97.19 & 87.54 & \(\bullet\) & 93.47 & \(\bullet\) & 88.55 & \(\bullet\) & 94.75 & \(\bullet\) \\ Primary-tumor & 43.09 & 50.47 & 43.41 & 48.26 & 47.29 & 46.11 & 47.52 & 46.00 & \\ Segment & 95.37 & 91.77 & \(\bullet\) & 94.24 & 93.99 & 90.25 & 92.75 & 92.48 & 91.52 & \\ Sick & 97.32 & 97.19 & 95.63 & 97.71 & 97.47 & 97.70 & 97.38 & 97.52 & \\ Sonar & 85.04 & 85.12 & 84.57 & 77.63 & 75.33 & 76.66 & 75.66 & 76.09 & \\ Soybean & 92.68 & 92.83 & 92.68 & 93.96 & 93.68 & 94.45 & 93.92 & 93.47 & \\ Splice & 94.55 & 95.39 & 94.36 & 95.03 & 96.03 & 96.20 & 96.05 & 95.97 & \\ Vehicle & 71.63 & 63.59 & \(\bullet\) & 69.49 & 70.96 & 61.27 & \(\bullet\) & 64.65 & 64.43 & 65.01 & \\ Vote & 94.49 & 90.11 & \(\bullet\) & 94.02 & 95.84 & 90.67 & 95.81 & 95.56 For the statistically significant tests shown in Table 3, the proposed CHNB method outperforms all other methods. CHNB significantly outperformed NB and FTNB on 16 datasets, while significantly losing on only two datasets.