Table 3

AUC comparisons

Loss-of-signal vs. Background

Interference vs. Background


Name

Relation

AUC

Name

Relation

AUC


n

LOS > Bg

0.93

n

I > Bg

0.88

k3

LOS > Bg

0.86

K

I > Bg

0.77

K

LOS > Bg

0.84

s1

I > Bg

0.76

t1

LOS > Bg

0.83

s2

I > Bg

0.75

s2

LOS > Bg

0.70

s3

I < Bg

0.71

k5

LOS > Bg

0.67

k2

I > Bg

0.67

t4

LOS > Bg

0.66

dW

I > Bg

0.66

k1

LOS > Bg

0.65

k5

I > Bg

0.66

t3

LOS < Bg

0.64

t3

I > Bg

0.66

s3

LOS < Bg

0.63

t4

I > Bg

0.61

s4

LOS < Bg

0.61

kW

I < Bg

0.60

dw

LOS > Bg

0.61

k7

I < Bg

0.58

k7

LOS < Bg

0.58

k4

I < Bg

0.58

kW

LOS < Bg

0.57

s4

I < Bg

0.57

k2

LOS > Bg

0.57

k1

I < Bg

0.57

k4

LOS < Bg

0.56

k3

I > Bg

0.56

t2

LOS > Bg

0.56

k6

I > Bg

0.56


k6

LOS > Bg

0.54

t2

I > Bg

0.54

s1

LOS > Bg

0.51

t1

I < Bg

0.53


The results from the analysis step, comparing parameter value distributions of the two models with the background distribution. Parameters are sorted by area under ROC curves (AUC). The parameters under the line have a p-value greater than 0.05 and are not statistically significant, where p-values are calculated with a Wilcoxon rank-sum test. See also Fig. 5.

Sahlin et al. BMC Systems Biology 2011 5:2   doi:10.1186/1752-0509-5-2

Open Data