Table 5.
Error of AUC (mean) | Error of AUC (std.) | p-value | corr | corr | corr | corr | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
L∞ | 0.0923 | 0.0035 | 2.98 · 10-17 | - | 0.94 | 0.66 | 0.82 |
L∞(0.5) | 0.0806 | 0.0033 | 2.66 · 10-06 | 0.94 | - | 0.82 | 0.92 |
L1 | 0.0908 | 0.0042 | 1.92 · 10-16 | 0.66 | 0.82 | - | 0.90 |
L2 | 0.0780 | 0.0034 | - | 0.82 | 0.92 | 0.90 | - |
Results of experiment 1: disease relevant gene prioritization by genomic data fusion. The error of AUC values is evaluated by LOO validation in 20 random repetitions. The best performance (L2) is shown in bold. The p-values are compared with the best performance using a paired t-test. As shown, the L2 method is significantly better than other methods. The paired Spearman correlation scores compare similarities of rankings obtained by different approaches when compared with the target rankings (denoted as -). Higher Spearman correlation values mean that the two ranking results are much similar.