. 2023 Nov 29;14:7861. doi: 10.1038/s41467-023-43597-1

Table 1.

Performance evaluation of ablation studies on ZeroBind

Metric	Model	Transductive test	Semi-inductive test	Inductive test
AUROC	ZeroBind^MAML-	0.8632 ± 0.0071	0.7835 ± 0.0063	0.6153 ± 0.0031
	ZeroBind^SIB-	0.8556 ± 0.0056	0.8018 ± 0.0121	0.7122 ± 0.0042
	ZeroBind^attention-	0.9057 ± 0.0078	0.8352 ± 0.0020	0.7585 ± 0.0026
	ZeroBind^sampling-	0.9066 ± 0.0018	0.8280 ± 0.0031	0.7852 ± 0.0043
	ZeroBind^GIN	0.9412 ± 0.0050	0.8652 ± 0.0046	0.8025 ± 0.0027
	ZeroBind^random	0.8865 ± 0.0017	0.8254 ± 0.0082	0.7562 ± 0.0031
	ZeroBind	0.9521 ± 0.0038	0.8681 ± 0.0065	0.8139 ± 0.0045
AUPRC	ZeroBind^MAML-	0.9540 ± 0.0044	0.9115±0.0010	0.8547 ± 0.0027
	ZeroBind^SIB-	0.9385 ± 0.0117	0.9375 ± 0.0028	0.9242 ± 0.0058
	ZeroBind^attention-	0.9789 ± 0.0050	0.9742 ± 0.0065	0.9408 ± 0.0061
	ZeroBind^sampling-	0.9782 ± 0.0027	0.9645 ± 0.0063	0.9655 ± 0.0057
	ZeroBind^GIN	0.9831 ± 0.0043	0.9850 ± 0.0058	0.9817 ± 0.0062
	ZeroBind^random	0.9635 ± 0.0056	0.9375 ± 0.0151	0.9288 ± 0.0071
	ZeroBind	0.9896 ± 0.0013	0.9880 ± 0.0062	0.9872 ± 0.0020

The average is reported after performing each experiment five times, along with the standard deviation. The bold face indicates the method is the best across the compared methods.