Skip to main content

Table 3 The sensitivity of 18 methods on the Lindahl's dataset.

From: Improving protein fold recognition by random forest

Method

Family

Superfamily

Fold

Top1

Top5

Top1

Top5

Top1

Top5

PSI-Blast

71.2

72.3

27.4

27.9

4

4.7

HMMER

67.7

73.5

20.7

31.3

4.4

14.6

SAM-T98

70.1

75.4

28.3

38.9

3.4

18.7

BLASTLINK

74.6

78.9

29.3

40.6

6.9

16.5

SSERCH

68.6

75.5

20.7

32.5

5.6

15.6

SSHMM

63.1

71.7

18.4

31.6

6.9

24

THREADER

49.2

58.9

10.8

24.7

14.6

37.7

Fugue

82.2

85.8

41.9

53.2

12.5

26.8

SPARKS

81.6

88.1

52.5

69.1

28.7

47.7

SP3

81.6

86.8

55.3

67.7

30.8

47.4

HHpred

82.9

87.1

58

70

25.2

39.4

SP4

80.9

86.3

57.8

57.8

30.8

53.6

SP5

82.4

87.6

59.8

70

37.9

58.7

RAPTOR

86.6

89.3

56.3

69

38.2

58.7

SPARKS-X

84.1

90.3

59.0

76.3

45.2

67.0

BoostThreader

86.5

90.5

66.1

76.4

42.6

57.4

FOLDpro

85

89.9

55

70

26.5

48.3

RF-fold

84.5

91.5

63.4

79.3

40.8

58.3

  1. The bold font denotes the highest sensitivity in their respective categories of prediction. The results of other methods are taken from [5, 28, 29]