“…Finally, we avoided to fill missing outcomes for such methods, like GIF, where the authors provided a fine-tuning of their algorithms, since our last assumptions would not replicate the same performances. [98] 1.00 [98] 0.59 [11] 0.71 [98] 0.65 [98] 0.98 [98] 0.72 [98] 0.91 [93] EIF 0.99 0.85 [37] 0.92 0.99 [37] 0.86 0.78 0.70 0.99 0.80 [37] 0.91 RRCF 0.99 [29] 0.89 [29] 0.91 0.91 [18] 0.83 [18] 0.68 [18] 0.59 [18] 0.64 [18] 0.74 [18] 0.90 [18] IMF [18] 0.99 -0.84 [18] OPHiForest [53], Split-Criteria Isolation Forest (SCIForest) [54], Extended Isolation Forest (EIF) [33], Robust Random Cut Forest (RRCF) [30], Isolation Mondrian Forest (IMF) [60], Mondrian Polya Forest (MPF) [18], Partial Identification Forest (PIDForest) [29], Order Preserving Hashing Based Isolation Forest (OPHIF) [93], Locality Sensitive Hashing Isolation Forest (LSHiForest) [98], Hybrid Isolation Forest (HIF) [64], Hybrid Extended Isolation Forest (HEIF) [37], One-class Random Forest (OneClassRF) [27], Trident Forest (T-Forest) [97], Entropy-based Greedy Isolation Tree (EGiTree) [50], Generalized Isolation Forest (GIF) [11], Distribution Forest (dForest) [95], Re-Mass Isolation Forest (ReMass IF) [6], Half-Spaces Forest (HSF) [84]. Scores are referenced when are provided by a different source than the original paper for the method.…”