Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 3 FINE/GOOD/EXCELLENT comparison on CFTR dataset

From: Lossless filter for multiple repeats with bounded edit distance

d q p selectiveness (%) running time(s) Good-Fine Excellent-Good Excellent-Fine
    Fine Good Excel FINE GOOD Excel SU SI SD SI SD SI
  8 13 13.84 5.10 1.36 123 116 131 1.055 2.71 1.129 3.76 1.070 10.21
  7 24 12.85 1.91 0.05 371 370 385 1.003 6.71 1.041 41.90 1.037 281.28
10 6 35 14.28 0.89 0.01 1286 1292 1326 0.995 16.05 1.026 81.23 1.031 1304.19
  5 46 21.92 0.65 0.00 5080 5138 5183 0.989 33.95 1.009 235.94 1.020 8011.07
  4 57 57.96 1.02 0.00 13441 13362 13564 1.006 56.77 1.015 391.15 1.009 22208.66
  7 10 50.85 24.51 13.50 405 382 468 1.059 2.07 1.223 1.81 1.155 3.76
12 6 23 28.09 3.99 0.13 1274 1262 1338 1.009 7.04 1.060 30.37 1.051 214.04
  5 36 36.84 2.30 0.04 4972 4952 5055 1.004 16.02 1.021 53.37 1.017 855.33
  4 49 85.10 3.53 0.02 13834 13612 13676 1.016 24.08 1.004 162.60 0.988 3916.57
  6 11 99.63 96.79 85.71 1609 1405 2159 1.145 1.02 1.536 1.12 1.342 1.16
14 5 26 75.19 12.46 0.35 5017 4794 5080 1.047 6.03 1.060 35.70 1.013 215.46
  4 41 99.68 25.08 0.08 14290 13969 14112 1.023 3.97 1.010 299.49 0.988 1190.06
         mean 1.029 14.70 1.094 111.54 1.060 3184.32
  1. Measures for FINE/GOOD/EXCELLENT on the CFTR dataset with different parameters sets (L, r = 100,5) with large errors d and different values of q. Recall that SD, SU and SI stand for speed-up, slowdown and selectiveness improvement respectively.