Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(51)
The analysis of results is divided into two parts, based on the sequence separation of predicted pairs, as contact predictions between residue pairs lying far apart in the sequence are more difficult to predict than the ones closer in sequence separation.
When the comparison was done over a larger set of predicted pairs (we selected the first 800 predictions, that is the total number of predictions provided by the GF method, APPIA was 1.41 times more accurate than the GC method, 3.80 times more accurate than GF, 9.65 times more than PP, 32.38 times more than MT and 47.67 times more accurate than I2H.
Given a reference structure, the performance of prediction algorithms is evaluated in terms of sensitivity (S), i.e. the percentage of base pairs in the reference structure, which are predicted correctly, as well as positive predictive value (PPV), i.e. the percentage of predicted pairs, which are in the reference structure.
In Fig. 3 each line represents the accuracy, measured as the ratio of true positive predictions divided by the number of predictions in the extended test set for an increasing number of predicted pairs (the equivalent figure for the Test Set is shown in Fig. S1).
Figure 10 shows that predicted pairs allow us to draw much stronger conclusions.
Among the 20 predicted pairs, 6 pairs that cover the potential thermal-dynamic regions are selected for experimental verification.
Similar(8)
PITA [ 53] is a leading microRNA target prediction approach that considers multiple factors, such as seed pairing, site number, overall predicted pairing stability and predicted site accessibility.
Additionally, AODE provides quantitative probability estimates that can be used as a measure of reliability associated to each predicted pair.
This true for the density of intronic RNAz hits (see Figure 3a), as well as the density of predicted paired bases (see Figure 3b).
The predicted pairing is shown in Fig. S6.
(A ) Predicted pairing of miR-124 to two sites in the tra F transcript.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com