Skip to main content
. 2010 Mar 18;11:140. doi: 10.1186/1471-2105-11-140

Table 2.

Information regarding the increase of efficiency and simultaneous decrease of complexity throughout the various training phases of ENFRN

Composite Score Values in ENFRN Structures Number of Rules and Output Nodes in ENFRN Structures
a/a Regulator Target Initial Simplified

Initial Simplified Trained Rules Output Rules Output
1 HTB1 HTA1 0.899 0.935 0.533 12 9 12 9

2 HTA1 HHF1 1.056 0.988 0.435 11 8 9 8

3 HHF1 HTA2 0.644 0.698 0.595 12 10 11 10

4 HTB1 HHF1 0.842 0.815 0.536 12 8 10 8

5 HHF1 HTB2 0.654 0.642 0.560 12 8 10 8

6 HHF2 HTA1 0.741 0.773 0.618 14 10 12 10

7 HHF2 HTA2 0.657 0.669 0.543 14 10 12 10

8 HHF2 HHF1 0.748 0.785 0.503 14 9 12 8

9 HHT1 HTA1 0.898 0.916 0.664 12 9 10 9

10 HHT1 HTB1 1.095 1.097 0.811 12 10 10 9

11 HHT1 HTB2 0.632 0.660 0.567 12 8 10 8

12 HHT1 HHF2 0.841 0.791 0.755 12 9 10 9

13 HTA1 HHT2 1.233 1.188 0.606 11 9 8 8

14 HHT2 HHF1 0.658 0.625 0.567 14 9 14 9

15 HHF2 HHT2 0.890 0.881 0.589 14 10 13 10

16 HHT2 HHT1 0.962 0.975 0.749 14 10 10 9

We can depict a decrease at the complexity levels (i.e. 87% of the 16 extracted interactions described in table) between the initial and the simplified structures followed by a corresponding decrease in the score levels between the phases of the initial and the trained ENFRN.