Table 13 Comparing the performance of the S-PUL method (for four versions separately) with the [12] study
From: Disease candidate genes prediction using positive labeled and unlabeled instances
The name of the disease | Method | Precision | Recall | F1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Colon | Nikdel et al. [12] | 93% | 94% | 93% |
S-PUL_V1 | 82.66% | 97.84% | 89.61% | |
S-PUL_V3 | 88.55% | 99.32% | 93.69% | |
S-PUL_V4 | 86.68% | 98.98% | 92.42% | |
S-PUL_V5 | 95.14% | 99.32% | 97.19% | |
Lung | Nikdel et al. [12] | 91.1% | 95% | 93.3% |
S-PUL_V1 | 79.06% | 88.69% | 83.6% | |
S-PUL_V3 | 89.28% | 92.59% | 90.9% | |
S-PUL_V4 | 85.71% | 88.88% | 87.27% | |
S-PUL_V5 | 92.85% | 96.29% | 94.54% | |
Prostate | Nikdel et al. [12] | 92% | 95% | 93% |
S-PUL_V1 | 77.46% | 96.98% | 86.13% | |
S-PUL_V3 | 93.06% | 98.83% | 95.86% | |
S-PUL_V4 | 89.64% | 97.28% | 93.3% | |
S-PUL_V5 | 95.14% | 98.83% | 96.95% |