Skip to main content

Table 8 Comparison of predictive accuracy of our method and MitPred for both plant and nonplant proteins in the TargetP data set

From: Subcellular location prediction of proteins using support vector machines with alignment of block sequences utilizing amino acid composition

Predictor

Location

Sensitivity

Specificity

MCC

Our method

plant mTP

0.9348

0.8958

0.8587

MitPred (SVM)

plant mTP

0.8234

0.8584

0.7418

MitPred (BLAST+SVM)

plant mTP

0.9429

0.8422

0.8158

MitPred (HMM+SVM)

plant mTP

0.8668

0.8484

0.7644

Our method

nonplant mTP

0.7547

0.8333

0.7626

MitPred (SVM)

nonplant mTP

0.8194

0.8863

0.8302

MitPred (BLAST+SVM)

nonplant mTP

0.9380

0.9355

0.9268

MitPred (HMM+SVM)

nonplant mTP

0.8571

0.9408

0.8830

  1. Note: In our methods, parameters shown in Table 2 of the manuscript were used, but "posconstraint" and "negconstraint" were not specified for nonplant mTP. For MitPred, we used default parameters as follows. In SVM method, threshold was set as 0.5. E-value cutoff of BLAST+SVM method was 1e-4. E-value and SVM threshold for HMM based Pfam search+SVM method were 1e-5 and 0.5 respectively.