Table 6 Gathered p-values from statistically testing the superiority of DI2 with respect to predictive accuracy against alternative discretization procedures, and original data, using one-tailed paired t-test and considering 5 categories per variable (complementary information in Additional file 3)

Naïve Bayes

0.686

0.897

0.005

0.719

0.287

0.431

0.002

0.325

Random Forest

0.404

0.921

0.101

0.998

0.126

0.653

0.016

0.998

SMO

0.980

0.968

0.014

0.456

0.790

0.773

0.017

0.441

C4.5

0.500

0.345

0.044

0.965

0.230

0.194

0.013

0.891

MLRM

0.500

0.907

0.009

0.803

0.316

0.821

0.013

0.588

FleBiC

0.001

0.007

1.9E−08

–

2.1E−05

1.0E−04

6.7E−09

–

FleBiC Hybrid

5.4E−04

0.693

5.2E−05

–

0.030

0.873

2.0E−04

–

Naïve Bayes

0.948

0.991

0.020

0.965

0.662

0.822

0.004

0.712

Random Forest

0.066

0.426

0.012

0.992

0.074

0.666

0.195

0.999

SMO

0.906

0.914

0.042

0.641

0.805

0.813

0.026

0.406

C4.5

0.085

0.072

0.004

0.702

0.687

0.500

0.028

0.958

MLRM

0.952

0.986

0.148

0.993

0.721

0.896

0.047

0.942

FleBiC

8.0E−05

7.3E−05

1.5E−08

–

0.002

0.016

9.1E−08

–

FleBiC Hybrid

1.4E−05

0.001

4.3E−06

–

6.1E−04

0.084

1.0E−04

–