Skip to main content

Table 1 Results of the eXtasy-based benchmark.

From: Problems with the nested granularity of feature domains in bioinformatics: the eXtasy case

  eXtasy benchmark class distribution realistic class distribution
Metric bootstraping hierarchical sampling bootstraping hierarchical sampling
Sensitivity 0.863751* 0.783985 0.888667* 0.816667
Specificity 0.951801 0.980001* 0.951809 0.980030*
Precision 0.711571 0.842510* 0.002423 0.005313*
NPV 0.980934* 0.970764 0.999985* 0.999976
MCC 0.751416 0.788129* 0.044896 0.064834*
AUC-ROC 0.972466 0.973497 0.979336 0.981345
AUC-PR 0.888809 0.895255 0.095083 0.128191
  1. Results of the benchmark in terms of average Sensitivity, Specificity, Precision, Negative predictive value (NPV) and Matthews correlation coefficient (MCC). Bold typing indicates which method of generating in-bag sample is better given a performance measure and a classification scenario, while asterisk (*) points on statistically significant differences (p = 0.05 level). The values of the area under the ROC and PR curve are obtained from the average curves constructed by threshold averaging; hence no statistical testing has been applied on these.