TABLE 4.
Comparison results of different classifiers in three model plant PPI datasets.
Plant | Classifier | ACC. (%) | Sen. (%) | PR. (%) | MCC. (%) | AUC |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A. thaliana | LR | 68.84 | 67.12 | 69.52 | 37.72 | 0.7639 |
DT | 81.81 | 81.92 | 81.74 | 63.62 | 0.8179 | |
Our method | 89.47 | 91.47 | 87.97 | 79.02 | 0.9548 | |
Zea mays | LR | 86.70 | 85.63 | 87.49 | 73.41 | 0.9267 |
Dt | 92.60 | 92.78 | 92.44 | 85.20 | 0.9296 | |
Our method | 95.00 | 96.30 | 93.85 | 90.02 | 0.9867 | |
Oryza sativa | Loss | 77.65 | 79.23 | 76.82 | 55.34 | 0.8476 |
DT | 73.78 | 70.07 | 74.62 | 47.58 | 0.7385 | |
Our method | 85.63 | 86.38 | 85.11 | 71.28 | 0.9213 |