Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2013 Mar 14.
Published in final edited form as: Proteins. 2011 Nov 22;80(2):352–361. doi: 10.1002/prot.23183

Table 3.

Alignment accuracy on the top 10 SP3 templates for the 1192 benchmark set.

GDT-TS score to native
Benchmark set CASP9 set
874 Easy 318 Hard 80 Easy 32 Hard
Change relative to SP3* Change relative to SP3 Change relative to SP3 Change relative to SP3
SP3 alternative alignment 2.9% 2.6% 2.6% 3.2%
HHSEARCH alignment 0.7% −2.9% 1.4% −2.8%
TM-align alignment 15.3% 40.7% 16.7% 38.8%
Comparison with TM-align
Correct match# Correct match Correct match Correct match
SP3 alignment 58.95/68.09/72.17 12.87/19.04/23.16 58.58/67.21/71.02 19.80/25.84/29.73
SP3 alternative alignment 60.77/70.62/74.47 13.09/19.61/23.96 60.19/69.08/72.75 20.75/27.96/32.23
HHSEARCH alignment 59.70/68.67/72.56 12.01/17.97/21.88 60.04/68.57/72.50 18.61/24.63/28.84

GDT-TSscores are calculated using full length models built from alignments with MODELLER28.

*

Defined as (model GDT-TS of this method – model GDT-TS of SP3)/(model GDT-TS of SP3).

#

Correct match is defined as that when the threading and structural alignments of the target residue to the template residue are identical, within ±1, or ±2 (third number) residues apart. The number of matches in a given target is normalized by alignment length of TM-align41. Presented numbers are the average per target per template and in percentages.