Table 3 Performance (correlation coefficients and rmse) of our models in comparison to ShiftX2 using the test set created by our pipeline
Prediction | N correlation | CA correlation | CB correlation | C correlation | H correlation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Method | (rmse) | (rmse) | (rmse) | (rmse) | (rmse) |
Spinster | 0.817 (2.977) | 0.956 (1.425) | 0.992 (1.582) | 0.731 (1.524) | 0.593 (0.505) |
ShiftX2 | 0.554 (5.606) | 0.953 (1.475) | 0.984 (2.238) | 0.711 (1.65) | 0.534 (0.583) |
Training / test size | 39,147 / 26,099 | 39,947 / 26,632 | 36,211 / 24,142 | 29,065 / 19,377 | 41,076 / 27,385 |
Prediction | HA correlation | HB correlation | HD correlation | HEHZ correlation | HG correlation |
method | (rmse) | (rmse) | (rmse) | (rmse) | (rmse) |
Spinster | 0.997 (2.889) | 0.82 (0.559) | 0.994 (0.324) | 0.981 (0.375) | 0.86 (0.365) |
ShiftX2 | 0.517 (5.998) | 0.721 (1.033) | 0.012 (0.706) | 0.816 (0.505) | -0.147 (0.967) |
Training / test size | 42,639 / 28,427 | 37,263 / 24,843 | 22,508 / 15,006 | 12,919 / 8,613 | 25,932 /17,289 |