Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 4 The basic information of results of different methods based on AlingNemo’s dataset

From: Detecting conserved protein complexes using a dividing-and-matching algorithm and unequally lenient criteria for network comparison

Methods Yeast-fly
Conserved pairs Yeast Fly
Distinct complexes (size ≥2) Avg size Distinct complexes (size ≥2) Avg size
UEDAMAlignCFinder (k = 4) 126 126 8.02 126 17.13
UEDAMAlignCMC 127 127 10.57 127 23.39
UEDAMAlignCoach 1,019 1,019 9.34 1,019 18.6
UEDAMAlignknowncomplex 160 160 4.04 156 8.65
UEDAMAlignMCL 697 697 6.26 696 5.35
AlignNemo 248 243 9.27 246 10.06
AlignMCL 684 523 3.63 630 12.92
Methods Human-fly
Conserved pairs Human Fly
Distinct complexes (size ≥2) Avg size Distinct complexes (size ≥2) Avg size
UEDAMAlignCFinder (k = 4) 116 116 9.74 114 8.86
UEDAMAlignCMC 288 288 9.86 287 9.24
UEDAMAlignCoach 2,978 2,978 14.82 2,968 13.98
UEDAMAlignknowncomplex 333 333 4 312 3.98
UEDAMAlignMCL 679 679 3.45 677 3.11
AlignNemo 114 114 12.27 114 11.94
AlignMCL 732 732 4.68 729 4.18