Table 1. Evaluation of the dataset.
Method | True (%) | False positive (%) |
---|---|---|
Dodd and Egan | 65.0 | 15.0 |
Gibbs | 50.7 | 30.0 |
PROSITE | 67.9 | 9.3 |
Blattner annotations | 97.6 | 21.0 |
We used the dataset of 159 experimentally supported proteins to evaluate the performance of the methods. The evaluations of the Dodd and Egan and Gibbs methods were done by comparing with the set of 128 proteins that have a reported HTH motif.