Skip to main content

Table 2 Error rate comparison between best performing Omni-PolyA model and state-of-the-art results in benchmark poly(A) dataset from [31]

From: Omni-PolyA: a method and tool for accurate recognition of Poly(A) signals in human genomic DNA

Variants

Size

Error rate (%)

DPS

HMM_SVM

Omni-PolyA

AATAAA

5190

23.72

28.13

14.02

ATTAAA

2400

16.63

23.96

12.5

AAGAAA

1250

14.00

10.96

10.8

AAAAAG

1230

8.05

8.62

4.87

AATACA

880

20.00

19.89

13.52

TATAAA

780

18.08

16.79

13.85

ACTAAA

690

23.33

26.38

14.49

AGTAAA

670

19.55

23.13

13.13

GATAAA

460

21.74

12.83

8.48

AATATA

410

18.05

14.15

13.41

CATAAA

410

20.00

14.15

14.39

AATAGA

370

18.38

8.11

11.62

Average

 

19.25

21.21

12.43

  1. DPS and HMM_SVM results correspond to those obtained by the methods described in Kalkatawi et al. [31] and Xie et al. [33], respectively. One observes that the relative decrease of the weighted average error rate of Omni-PolyA compared to DPS and HMM_SVM is 35.37% and 41.34%, respectively. The error rate of the best performing model for each PAS variant is italicized