Skip to main content

Table 9 Performance of BioHEL for the compared reduced alphabets in the CN and RSA datasets.

From: Automated Alphabet Reduction for Protein Datasets

Alphabet % Acc. on CN dataset % Acc. on RSA dataset
AA 74.0 ± 0.6 70.7 ± 0.4
DualRMI 73.3 ± 0.5 70.3 ± 0.4
WW5 73.1 ± 0.7 69.6 ± 0.4•
SR5 73.1 ± 0.7 69.6 ± 0.4•
MU4 72.6 ± 0.7• 69.4 ± 0.4•
MM5 73.1 ± 0.6 69.3 ± 0.3•
HD1 72.9 ± 0.6 69.3 ± 0.4•
HD2 73.0 ± 0.6 69.3 ± 0.4•
HD3 73.2 ± 0.6 69.9 ± 0.4•
  1. A • marks reduced datasets where BioHEL performs significantly worse than the AA type dataset according to the t-tests with a 99% confidence level. A marks the alphabets that performed significantly worse than the DualRMI strategy.