Skip to main content

Table 4 ACT participant results

From: The Protein-Protein Interaction tasks of BioCreative III: classification/ranking of articles and linking bio-ontology concepts to full text

Team

Run/Srvr

Accuracy

Specificity

Sensitivity

F-Score

MCC

AUC iP/R

Time_half

TC

RUN _1

89.03

93.87

61.98

63.16

0.56733

68.98

30.13

T65

RUN_1

88.68

97.64

38.57

50.83

0.48297

63.85

40.19

T65

RUN_2

87.93

93.07

59.23

59.82

0.52727

63.89

40.19

T65

RUN_3

67.05

64.19

83.08

43.34

0.34244

41.74

55.95

T65

RUN_4

73.68

74.13

71.21

45.08

0.34650

41.74

55.95

T65

RUN_5

88.00

94.40

52.20

56.89

0.50255

62.39

40.83

T70

RUN_1

56.45

49.70

94.18

39.62

0.31789

56.76

42.12

T70

RUN_2

87.41

96.11

38.79

48.32

0.43346

56.76

42.13

T70

RUN_3

81.92

83.61

72.53

54.91

0.46563

56.76

42.12

T70

RUN_4

47.77

39.04

96.59

35.95

0.27060

56.76

42.12

T70

RUN_5

86.84

98.62

20.99

32.62

0.34488

56.76

42.13

T73

RUN_1

87.55

91.81

63.74

60.83

0.53524

65.91

38.33

T73

RUN_2

89.15

94.95

56.70

61.32

0.55306

67.96

37.10

T73

RUN_3

87.78

92.61

60.77

60.14

0.52932

65.89

38.19

T73

RUN_4

88.88

94.34

58.35

61.42

0.55054

67.98

37.15

T73

RUN_5

87.62

92.18

62.09

60.33

0.53031

65.37

38.40

T81

RUN_1

59.03

58.76

60.55

30.96

0.13949

19.93

82.27

T81

RUN_2

58.47

57.86

61.87

31.12

0.14219

19.69

82.76

T81

RUN_3

25.37

14.72

84.95

25.66

-0.00344

15.66

102.73

T81

RUN_4

63.45

69.16

31.54

20.74

0.00538

16.20

104.95

T81

RUN_5

69.17

77.35

23.41

18.72

0.00645

15.63

98.72

T81

SRVR_9

84.88

99.98

0.44

0.88

0.05220

44.19

50.11

T81

SRVR_10

85.38

99.61

5.82

10.78

0.17771

50.25

45.11

T81

SRVR_11

84.73

99.86

0.11

0.22

-0.00272

46.02

48.23

T81

SRVR_12

84.30

98.86

2.86

5.23

0.05244

32.11

56.89

T81

SRVR_13

84.88

99.92

0.77

1.52

0.05791

18.59

113.11

T88

RUN_1

42.63

35.11

84.73

30.94

0.15238

21.97

84.90

T88

RUN_2

56.92

53.73

74.73

34.47

0.20417

26.04

75.33

T89

RUN_1

80.02

80.90

75.06

53.26

0.44911

61.29

41.31

T89

RUN_2

81.00

81.75

76.81

55.08

0.47242

62.13

40.99

T89

RUN_3

82.40

83.85

74.29

56.15

0.48180

60.48

41.72

T89

RUN_4

87.73

94.79

48.24

54.40

0.47967

43.76

43.09

T89

RUN_5

87.27

91.81

61.87

59.58

0.52082

48.47

44.57

T89

SRVR_4

77.80

77.84

77.58

51.46

0.43152

57.44

44.63

T89

SRVR_5

78.05

78.15

77.47

51.71

0.43424

57.56

45.20

T89

SRVR_6

79.90

81.00

73.74

52.67

0.44073

54.97

45.93

T89

SRVR_7

86.25

92.06

53.74

54.24

0.46156

41.58

45.94

T89

SRVR_8

86.87

90.39

67.14

60.80

0.53336

47.40

45.55

T90

RUN_1

88.73

95.15

52.86

58.73

0.52736

51.14

39.02

T90

RUN_2

88.70

94.97

53.63

59.01

0.52890

51.65

39.14

T90

RUN_3

88.32

93.93

56.92

59.64

0.52914

65.24

39.29

T90

RUN_4

88.93

96.03

49.23

57.44

0.52237

49.26

70.68

T90

RUN_5

88.60

95.05

52.53

58.29

0.52204

50.83

39.27

T92

RUN_1

86.22

90.77

60.77

57.22

0.49155

50.99

42.40

T100

RUN_1

88.77

96.82

43.74

54.15

0.50005

61.62

42.57

T100

RUN_2

88.27

93.89

56.81

59.49

0.52732

61.86

39.05

T100

RUN_3

81.13

82.69

72.42

53.80

0.45256

60.25

41.60

T100

RUN_4

81.85

82.85

76.26

56.04

0.48270

63.75

38.41

T104

RUN_1

80.12

80.69

76.92

53.99

0.45999

53.67

48.21

T104

RUN_2

80.07

80.47

77.80

54.21

0.46370

53.67

48.21

T104

RUN_3

64.93

59.86

93.3049

44.66

0.38161

53.67

48.21

T104

RUN_4

69.78

66.25

89.56

47.34

0.40530

53.67

48.21

T104

RUN_5

86.27

98.47

18.02

28.47

0.30064

53.67

142.95

  1. Evaluation results based on the unrefined Gold Standard, in terms of Accuracy, MCC Score and AUC iP/R. The highest score for each evaluation column is show in bold typeface. Run/Srvr (RUN = offline run/SRVR = online run via the BCMS), MCC (Matthew's Correlation Coefficient), AUC iP/R (Area under the interpolated Precion/Recall curve). Time_half is the fraction of time needed to classify half of the positive abstracts using the output of that run when compared to unranked results. Note that some runs submitted by mistake the opposite ranking as requested for the negative records, which explains higher classification time (e.g. Team 104, RUN 5 with Time_half of 142.95), inverting in these cases the order of negative articles resulted in comparable time savings to the other systems.