Table 1.

Influence of Postprocessing Methods on the Performance of the Promoter Predictors

PostprocessingVersion 1.1Version 2.0
recognized promotersfalse positive rate per baserecognized promotersfalse positive rate per base
None471/450571/719
Hysteresis331/1833431/1653
Median and hysteresis261/2633311/2437

[i] Shown are the results without any postprocessing (i.e., every local minimum is used as prediction), after hysteresis smoothing, and after both median and hysteresis smoothing. The postprocessing operations reduce the number of false positives for both versions, but it becomes clear that the effect is much better for the pure region-based approach of v. 1.1.