Table 2 Comparison results of EviDTI and baselines on the KIBA dataset

From: Evidential deep learning-based drug-target interaction prediction

KIBA

Accuracy (std)

Recall (std)

Precision (std)

MCC (std)

F1 score (std)

AUC (std)

AUPR (std)

RF

88.41 (0.34)

64.84 (2.48)

70.57 (2.30)

63.21 (1.67)

67.59 (1.37)

91.05 (0.38)

76.05 (1.04)

NB

52.92 (0.83)

71.72 (1.77)

24.22 (1.40)

24.56 (3.24)

36.21 (1.47)

65.92 (0.78)

35.51 (0.94)

SVM

81.72 (0.46)

3.87 (0.76)

66.40 (2.91)

5.24 (1.34)

7.32 (0.92)

73.27(0.56)

43.38 (1.60)

DeepConv-DTI

89.05 (0.32)

68.87 (0.43)

80.52 (0.34)

70.21 (0.28)

74.24 (0.63)

90.67 (0.17)

80.42 (0.62)

GraphDTA

88.92 (0.11)

59.42 (3.23)

77.53 (2.03)

67.51 (0.52)

71.24 (0.81)

91.41 (0.12)

77.61 (0.74)

MolTrans

88.91 (0.16)

73.53 (0.23)

70.42 (0.34)

67.62 (0.22)

71.94 (0.16)

92.32 (0.33)

79.49 (0.64)

HyperAttention

89.33 (0.12)

79.63 (0.24)

68.93 (0.18)

70.12 (0.22)

74.21 (0.35)

93.51 (0.17)

81.41 (0.23)

TransformerCPI

87.01 (0.18)

63.12 (0.32)

66.93 (0.34)

66.2 (0.26)

69.12 (0.23)

88.81 (0.18)

70.81 (0.16)

GraphormerDTI

86.54 (0.85)

85.40 (1.68)

60.63 (1.84)

64.03 (1.10)

70.87 (0.89)

92.58 (0.25)

81.95 (0.91)

AIGO-DTI

90.68 (0.32)

73.65 (0.77)

76.77 (1.12)

69.46 (0.97)

75.17 (0.77)

93.06 (0.26)

83.91 (0.77)

DLM-DTI

88.25 (0.25)

68.10 (2.15)

69.86 (0.90)

61.72 (0.78)

68.94 (0.87)

91.14 (0.39)

75.63 (0.41)

EviDTI

91.27 (0.07)

70.77 (1.69)

80.90 (1.32)

70.44 (0.78)

75.48 (0.83)

93.57 (0.35)

83.03 (0.98)

  1. The best results are highlighted in bold, while the second-best results are underlined. Five independent replications of each method were performed (n = 5). Data are expressed as means (std).