On Forest Cover classification, Binning+LS matched libSVM's printed 2.2% test error, slightly improved on CVM's 2.3%, and trained in 25 minutes versus 7.5 hours for CVM and 44 hours for libSVM. Fourier+LS was slower than binning and had much higher error, 11.6%.

On Forest Cover classification, Binning+LS matched libSVM's printed 2.2% test error, slightly improved on CVM's 2.3%, and trained in 25 minutes versus 7.5 hours for CVM and 44 hours for libSVM. Fourier+LS was slower than binning and had much higher error, 11.6%. · CiteArk

Measurement results

0/8 assessed

0 supported0 disputed or conflicting8 not assessed

The complete result group stays with its claim. Assessed rows come first; their judgments do not replace the whole-claim conclusion. Expand a row for conditions, sources, and evidence history.

Each row is a measurement with its reported value, latest available observation, and cumulative evidence state.
Reported	Latest observation	Evidence judgment
11.6%	—	Not assessed
71 minutes	—	Not assessed
2.2%	—	Not assessed
25 minutes	—	Not assessed
2.3%	—	Not assessed
7.5 hours	—	Not assessed
2.2%	—	Not assessed
44 hours	—	Not assessed

On Forest Cover classification, Binning+LS matched libSVM's printed 2.2% test error, slightly improved on CVM's 2.3%, and trained in 25 minutes versus 7.5 hours for CVM and 44 hours for libSVM. Fourier+LS was slower than binning and had much higher error, 11.6%.

Reported and observed measurements

Assessments (0)

Runs (0)

Measurement results