Table 2.
Performance comparison under different protein language models.
| TPR | TNR | Pre | ACC | F1 | MCC | AUROC | AP | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dset_448 | ||||||||
| ESM-1b | 0.725 | 0.652 | 0.246 | 0.662 | 0.368 | 0.264 | 0.759 | 0.349 |
| ProGen2 | 0.714 | 0.602 | 0.220 | 0.617 | 0.336 | 0.218 | 0.715 | 0.287 |
| ProtT5 | 0.448 | 0.916 | 0.455 | 0.852 | 0.451 | 0.366 | 0.810 | 0.442 |
| Dset_72 | ||||||||
| ESM-1b | 0.674 | 0.678 | 0.199 | 0.678 | 0.307 | 0.226 | 0.738 | 0.253 |
| ProGen2 | 0.684 | 0.554 | 0.154 | 0.568 | 0.251 | 0.147 | 0.658 | 0.176 |
| ProtT5 | 0.336 | 0.908 | 0.303 | 0.848 | 0.319 | 0.234 | 0.770 | 0.300 |
| Dset_164 | ||||||||
| ESM-1b | 0.732 | 0.542 | 0.261 | 0.576 | 0.375 | 0.211 | 0.690 | 0.324 |
| ProGen2 | 0.758 | 0.436 | 0.229 | 0.495 | 0.352 | 0.153 | 0.650 | 0.288 |
| ProtT5 | 0.308 | 0.909 | 0.427 | 0.800 | 0.358 | 0.248 | 0.740 | 0.384 |