Table 4.
Comparison of TASSERVMT with top CASP9 servers on the 112 targets.
| 80 Easy targets# | 32 Hard targets | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cumulative GDT-TS | p-value* | Cumulative GDT-TS | p-value | |
| TASSERVMT | 54.28 | - | 10.57 | - |
| Zhang-Server | 53.50 | 0.04 | 10.91 | 0.20 |
| QUARK | 53.45 | 0.03 | 10.73 | 0.36 |
| HHpredA | 52.63 | 0.007 | 9.23 | 0.03 |
| RaptorX | 52.97 | 0.007 | 10.29 | 0.32 |
| Seok-server | 51.95 | 1.0×10−4 | 9.91 | 0.12 |
| MULTICOM_CLUSTER | 51.72 | 2.9×10−5 | 9.63 | 0.04 |
| BAKER-ROSETTASERVER§ | - | - | 9.79 | 0.11 |
| chunk-TASSER | 50.43 | 2.0×10−11 | 9.96 | 0.05 |
| pro-sp3-TASSER | 50.16 | 1.2×10−13 | 9.67 | 0.01 |
#
A target is defined as Easy, if the averaged TM-score of the first models by the best 50% of all CASP9 servers is higher than 0.5; otherwise, it is classified as Hard. The list of targets can be found at http://zhanglab.ccmb.med.umich.edu/casp9/.
*
Two-sided p-value of the Student-t test between TASSERVMT and the given method. A p-value of ≤0.05 is considered statistically significant.
§
Because of missing targets, we did not put results for Easy targets here.