Skip to main content

Table 6 Comparison of BioCreAtIvE test set manual annotations with electronic GO annotation predictions.

From: An evaluation of GO annotation retrieval for BioCreAtIvE and GOA

  InterPro2GO SPKW2GO EC2GO  
Total IEA annotations 635 385 27  
Exact term 151 (0.24) 62 (0.16) 18(0.67) Correct
Same lineage > granularity 24 (0.04) 10 (0.03) 3 (0.11) Potentially Incorrect/Correct
Same lineage < granularity 273 (0.43) 170 (0.44) 1 (0.04) Correct
Total same lineage 297 (0.47) 180 (0.47) 4 (0.15) Potentially Incorrect/Correct
New lineage 187 (0.29) 143 (0.37) 5 (0.19) Potentially Incorrect/Correct
Total potential incorrect 211 (0.33) 153 (0.40) 8 (0.30)  
Total minimal correct 424 (0.67) 232 (0.60) 19 (0.70)  
Precision 0.67–1.00 0.60–1.00 0.70–1.00  
  1. Where the GO evidence code IEA is 'Inferred from Electronic Annotation' [27]. 'Same lineage > granularity' means where the electronic mapping (InterPro2GO, EC2GO or SPKW2GO) predicted a GO term that was in the same lineage/branch as the manually curated GO term but represented a more granular/parent term. 'Total potential incorrect' annotations = 'Same lineage >granularity' + 'New lineage'. 'Total minimal correct' annotations = 'Exact term' + 'Same lineage < granularity'. Percentage calculations are represented in parentheses.