-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 8
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Results_Interpretation #10
Comments
It will run with other versions of antismash that it was not trained on, but the predictions may be slightly less accurate due to the gene annotations being slightly different between versions. We are almost done adding support for antismash6 and will start working on adding support for 7 once it is out of beta. So far we have seen that using a mismatched training set/input antismash verison doesn't affect the predictions that much but we haven't tested it too rigorously. For the cutoffs it depends on the application and how tolerant you are to false positives. The values represent a probability of activity. So anything >50% means that the ml classifier thinks it is more likely to be active than not. But that does not mean that everything <50% will not be active. If you are limited in how much you can screen you can use a higher cutoff for a better chance of success. Also if all three classifiers give similar probabilities that would likely indicate a more reliable probability, if they disagree (e.g. one says 20% active, the other says 60%) it could indicate a cluster that is difficult to predict on because it is too dissimilar to the training set. We are still testing how it works on novel gene clusters but generally we look for all three classifiers to give probabilities >50%. |
Thank you so much! |
Hi |
Hi
Thank you so much for your nice tool and your hard work.
I have two question:
Thank you
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: