Table 3

Performance comparison of different approaches using cross-validation for the benchmark data sets.

PS1302


Localization

HYBRID

CELLO

PSORTb v.1.1

PSLpred

P-CLASSIFIER






Acc (%)

MCC

Acc (%)

MCC

Acc (%)

MCC

Acc (%)

MCC

Acc (%)

MCC


CP

    95.6

    0.90

90.7

0.85

69.4

0.79

90.7

0.86

94.6

0.85

IM

    93.3

    0.94

88.4

0.92

78.7

0.85

86.8

0.88

87.1

0.92

PP

    91.4

0.88

86.9

0.80

57.6

0.69

90.3

    0.90

85.9

0.81

OM

    96.3

    0.96

94.6

0.90

90.3

0.93

95.2

0.95

93.6

0.90

EC

90.0

    0.89

78.9

0.82

70.0

0.79

    90.6

0.84

86.0

0.89


Overall

    93.7

-

88.9

-

74.8

-

91.2

-

89.8

-


PS1444


Localization

HYBRID

CELLO II

PSORTb v.2.0

PSLpred

P-CLASSIFIER






Acc (%)

MCC

Acc (%)

MCC

Acc (%)

MCC

Acc (%)

MCC

Acc (%)

MCC


CP

95.0

    0.91

    95.3

0.89

70.1

0.77

-

-

-

-

IM

    93.5

    0.94

90.0

0.91

92.6

0.92

-

-

-

-

PP

    90.2

    0.86

87.7

0.82

69.2

0.78

-

-

-

-

OM

    96.7

    0.96

92.8

0.90

94.9

0.95

-

-

-

-

EC

    87.4

    0.87

79.5

0.82

78.9

0.86

-

-

-

-


Overall

    93.2

-

90.0

-

82.6

-

-

-

-

-


ยง The best performance of overall and individual localization sites is underlined.

Su et al. BMC Bioinformatics 2007 8:330   doi:10.1186/1471-2105-8-330

Open Data