. 2005 Jan 20;33(2):511–518. doi: 10.1093/nar/gki198

Table 3.

Comparison of performances of several methods based on 209 alignments in TWI tests

Method	Dataset	TWIs		TWIf		CPU
		f_D (%)	Improvement	f_D (%)	Improvement	time (s)
G-INS-i
	TWI+0	20.73^a	—	41.68^b	—	232.1
	TWI+20	27.38	+6.65^c	47.00^b	+5.32^c	747.4
	TWI+50	29.58	+8.85^c	51.11	+9.43^c	1724
H-INS-i
	TWI+0	23.36	—	42.78	—	154.1
	TWI+20	26.30^a	+2.94^c	47.40	+4.62^c	467.0
	TWI+50	27.87^a	+4.51^c	50.29^b	+7.51^c	1102
F-INS-i
	TWI+0	22.03^a	—	43.21	—	155.8
	TWI+20	25.80^a	+3.77^c	47.12	+3.91^c	405.1
	TWI+50	27.25^a	+5.22^c	47.59^a	+4.38^c	882.8
H-INS-1
	TWI+0	18.28^a	—	38.20^a	—	30.29
	TWI+20	22.48^a	+4.20^c	43.81^a	+5.61^c	144.6
	TWI+50	24.77^a	+6.49^c	45.76^a	+7.56^c	460.6
FFT-NS-i
	TWI+0	18.16^a	—	37.46^a	—	124.1
	TWI+20	21.64^a	+3.48^c	40.88^a	+2.29^c	303.8
	TWI+50	22.76^a	+4.60^c	44.85^a	+7.49^c	565.6
FFT-NS-2
	TWI+0	12.89^a	—	30.27^a	—	19.41
	TWI+20	16.14^a	+3.25^c	33.59^a	+3.32^c	44.54
	TWI+50	17.49^a	+4.60^c	37.08^a	+6.87^c	77.36
PROBCONS 1.06
	TWI+0	22.06	—	44.48	—	234.0
	TWI+20	22.79^a	+0.73^d	43.81^a	−0.67	1747
	TWI+50	22.53^a	+0.47	44.86^a	+0.38	6889
MUSCLE-i 3.41
	TWI+0	15.67^a	—	36.38^a	—	382.3
	TWI+20	17.98^a	+2.31^c	36.68^a	+0.30	999.9
	TWI+50	19.61^a	+3.94^c	38.17^a	+1.79^c	2152
TCoffee 2.02
	TWI+0	21.80^b	—	44.20	—	1378
	TWI+20	22.81^a	+1.01^c	44.56^b	+0.36^c	13 900
	TWI+50	21.85^a	+0.05^d	45.18^a	+0.98^c	82 200
CLUSTAL W 1.83
	TWI+0	12.76^a	—	34.28^a	—	31.52
	TWI+20	11.72^a	−1.04	33.59^a	−0.69	152.7
	TWI+50	12.91^a	+0.15	34.95^a	+0.67	458.8

See the footnote of Table 2.