Skip to main content
. 2018 May 29;126(5):057008. doi: 10.1289/EHP2998

Figure 2.

Figures 2A, 2B, 2C, and 2D are scatter plots with regression lines plotting observed value (log 10 mole) (y-axis) across prediction (log 10 mole) (x-axis) for RfD, RfD NOAEL, RfD BMD, and RfD BMDL, respectively. Figures 2E, 2F, 2G, and 2H are line graphs of model prediction and using mean observation plotting percentage with greater than absolute error (y-axis) across absolute error (log 10 mole) (x-axis) for RfD, RfD NOAEL, RfD BMD, and RfD BMDL, respectively. Subparts E, F, G and H also comprise box and whisker plots.

Conditional toxicity value (CTV) prediction errors based on 5-fold cross-validation for the RfD and associated NOAEL, BMD, or BMDL. (A–D) Scatter plots of QSAR-predicted versus “observed” regulatory toxicity values, with the dotted lines showing the range encompassing 90% of the predictions. (E–H) Comparison of the distributions of absolute prediction errors for CTV (solid line) and an alternative model using the observed mean value for every prediction (dashed line). Box plots show the corresponding interquartile region (box), median (line in box), mean (dot in box), and 95% confidence interval (whiskers). Note: Abs., absolute; BMD, benchmark dose; BMDL, benchmark dose lower confidence limit; NOAEL, no observed adverse effect level; QSAR, quantitative structure–activity relationship; RfD, reference dose.