Table 5 The comparison of F1-score between MSCNV and CNVkit.
From: A copy number variation detection method based on OCSVM algorithm using multi strategies integration
Configurations | N | Methods | M(QR) | P value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
SC = 20X, TP = 0.4 | 30 | MSCNV | 0.905(0.081) | 0.000 |
30 | CNVkit | 0.323(0.056) | ||
SC = 20X, TP = 0.6 | 30 | MSCNV | 0.952(0.026) | 0.000 |
30 | CNVkit | 0.424(0) | ||
SC = 20X, TP = 0.8 | 30 | MSCNV | 0.952(0) | 0.000 |
30 | CNVkit | 0.431(0.054) | ||
SC = 30X, TP = 0.4 | 30 | MSCNV | 0.929(0.076) | 0.000 |
30 | CNVkit | 0.323(0) | ||
SC = 30X, TP = 0.6 | 30 | MSCNV | 0.952(0) | 0.000 |
30 | CNVkit | 0.457(0.064) | ||
SC = 30X, TP = 0.8 | 30 | MSCNV | 0.952(0) | 0.000 |
30 | CNVkit | 0.412(0.129) | ||
SC = 40X, TP = 0.4 | 30 | MSCNV | 0.952(0.026) | 0.000 |
30 | CNVkit | 0.323(0.014) | ||
SC = 40X, TP = 0.6 | 30 | MSCNV | 0.952(0.022) | 0.000 |
30 | CNVkit | 0.457(0.064) | ||
SC = 40X, TP = 0.8 | 30 | MSCNV | 0.952(0) | 0.000 |
30 | CNVkit | 0.406(0.083) |
