Skip to main content

Table 3 Comparison of MDL, best-fit-I, and best-fit-II with CMI- and MDL-based filtering for yeast-pathway data

From: Using the minimum description length principle to reduce the rate of false positives of best-fit algorithms

Algorithm

Noise = 0

Noise = 5%

Noise = 10%

TP

FP

μ ham e

μssd

TP

FP

μ ham e

μssd

TP

FP

μ ham e

μssd

MDL

14

2

0.65

1.31

11.5

9

0.93

1.42

8.9

12.5

1.11

1.45

BF-I

15

5

0.71

1.25

12.2

11.9

0.99

1.44

9.8

18.4

1.25

1.49

BF-I-CMI

11

1

0.71

1.43

10.4

9

0.96

1.47

8.3

14

1.17

1.51

BF-I-MDL

14

2

0.65

1.17

10.8

8.5

0.93

1.43

8.6

13.1

1.13

1.48

BF-II

15

3

0.65

1.41

12.4

10.4

0.94

1.45

10.6

16.5

1.17

1.48

BF-II-CMI

12

2

0.71

1.46

11

8.7

0.93

1.47

8.3

12.4

1.12

1.50

BF-II-MDL

13

1

0.65

1.36

11.1

7.7

0.9

1.42

9.2

11.9

1.08

1.44