reaction ID | reaction type | n | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
|---|
a | b | a | b | a | b | | | | | | |
R1 | Binding | 56 | | 56 | | | | | | | |
R2 | Binding | 20 | | | 3 | 15 | | | | 2 | |
R3 | phosphorylation | 1 | | 1 | | | | | | | |
+ site information | 5 | | | | | 4 | 1 | | | | |
+ modifier information | 1 | | | | | | | 1 | | | |
R5 | degradation | 1 | | 1 | | | | | | | |
+ modifier information | 3 | | | | | | 1 | | | 2 | |
R7 | Binding | 12 | | 3 | 2 | 6 | | 1 | | | |
R8 | gene expression | 9 | 3 | | 4 | | | | 2 | | |
R9 | gene expression | 10 | 3 | 2 | 4 | | | | 1 | | |
R10 | processing | 12 | 11 | 1 | | | | | | | |
- The indirect expressions were subdivided by ‘inference’ scheme. Biologists often build a pathway by ‘inference’ with their biological domain knowledge from indirect expressions in the text. There are nine inference schemes when regarding indirect expressions, which indicate specific reactions. The figures are the number of sentences in each ‘inference’ scheme. Class 1a: state(s) of entity(-ies) before reaction, 1b: state(s) of entity(-ies) after reaction, 2a: function(s) of entity(-ies) before reaction, 2b: function(s) of entity(-ies) after reaction, 3a: influence of state change(s) of entity(-ies), 3b: influence of functional change(s) of entity(-ies), 4: related reaction, 5: reverse reaction, 6:characteristic of reaction.
