Table 4 |
||||||
|
Comparative results for interaction pair extraction |
||||||
|
Compared models |
Whole collection |
SwissProt only article collection |
||||
|
|
||||||
|
Precision |
Recall |
F1 score |
Precision |
Recall |
F1 score |
|
|
|
||||||
|
Mean |
0.1062 |
0.1858 |
0.1035 |
0.1160 |
0.2000 |
0.1127 |
|
Standard deviation |
0.0945 |
0.1001 |
0.0761 |
0.1035 |
0.1062 |
0.0836 |
|
Median |
0.0755 |
0.1961 |
0.0788 |
0.0808 |
0.2156 |
0.0842 |
|
Best reported in terms of F1 score [8] |
0.3908 |
0.2970 |
0.2849 |
0.3893 |
0.3073 |
0.2885 |
|
|
||||||
|
Template-based method (threshold = 0.0) |
0.1373 |
0.2905 |
0.1578 |
0.1566 |
0.3189 |
0.1784 |
|
Template-based method (threshold = 80.0) |
0.2177 |
0.2651 |
0.2038 |
0.2434 |
0.2828 |
0.2247 |
|
Profile-based method |
0.3096 |
0.2935 |
0.2623 |
0.3695 |
0.3268 |
0.3042 |
|
|
||||||
|
'Whole collection' means that all of the articles have been considered. 'SwissProt only article collection' include articles containing interaction pairs that can be normalized to SwissProt entries. The table shows the comparative results for the extraction of interaction pairs. |
||||||
|
Huang et al. Genome Biology 2008 9(Suppl 2):S12 doi:10.1186/gb-2008-9-s2-s12 |
||||||
