Table 1.
Performance comparison of residue contact prediction
| Method | Accuracy (%) | Coverage (%) | Accuracy (δ = 4) (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Comparison on the training data set | |||
| TMHcon | 25.9 | 3.5 | 78.5 |
| TMhhcp1 | 49.5 | 8.2 | 83.9 |
| TMhhcp2 | 45.8 | 7.4 | 83.8 |
| SVMcon | 8.4 | 1.5 | 55.1 |
| SVMSEQ | 13.0 | 2.8 | 60.9 |
| PSICOV | 42.1 | 6.7 | 74.7 |
| MemBraina | 61.4 | 10.1 | 89.1 |
| MemBrainb | 62.0 | 10.2 | 90.4 |
| Comparison on the independent data set | |||
| TMHcon | 23.6 | 3.0 | 83.4 |
| MEMPACK | 36.2 | 10.4 | 63.0 |
| TMhhcp1 | 48.1 | 6.1 | 84.4 |
| TMhhcp2 | 48.6 | 6.1 | 81.8 |
| SVMcon | 10.4 | 1.6 | 68.0 |
| SVMSEQ | 17.7 | 2.4 | 66.0 |
| PSICOV | 50.9 | 6.6 | 81.1 |
| MemBrain | 64.1 | 8.3 | 89.6 |
Note: aResults obtained from 4-fold cross-validation.
bResults obtained from jackknife cross-validation.