Table 2

Median Pearson correlation coefficient between Hi-C scores and predicted scores from epiphany, C. Origami, DynamicEdgeConv, GAT, GCN, and Chrombus. All models were trained and tested on the K562 cell line. Chrombus outperforms the other methods in predicting interactions at distances of 1–2 Mb.

Methods0–1 M1–2 M>2 MOverall
Epiphany0.7100.710
C.Origami0.7380.3340.767
DynamicEdgeConv0.3950.3570.3830.691
GAT0.0440.0280.0190.033
GCN0.0430.0140.0230.081
Chrombus0.6450.3810.2430.799
Methods0–1 M1–2 M>2 MOverall
Epiphany0.7100.710
C.Origami0.7380.3340.767
DynamicEdgeConv0.3950.3570.3830.691
GAT0.0440.0280.0190.033
GCN0.0430.0140.0230.081
Chrombus0.6450.3810.2430.799

The bold values indicate the best predictive performance obtained from the corresponding methods and the dash symbols mean the corresponding methods are not applicable in those ranges.

Table 2

Median Pearson correlation coefficient between Hi-C scores and predicted scores from epiphany, C. Origami, DynamicEdgeConv, GAT, GCN, and Chrombus. All models were trained and tested on the K562 cell line. Chrombus outperforms the other methods in predicting interactions at distances of 1–2 Mb.

Methods0–1 M1–2 M>2 MOverall
Epiphany0.7100.710
C.Origami0.7380.3340.767
DynamicEdgeConv0.3950.3570.3830.691
GAT0.0440.0280.0190.033
GCN0.0430.0140.0230.081
Chrombus0.6450.3810.2430.799
Methods0–1 M1–2 M>2 MOverall
Epiphany0.7100.710
C.Origami0.7380.3340.767
DynamicEdgeConv0.3950.3570.3830.691
GAT0.0440.0280.0190.033
GCN0.0430.0140.0230.081
Chrombus0.6450.3810.2430.799

The bold values indicate the best predictive performance obtained from the corresponding methods and the dash symbols mean the corresponding methods are not applicable in those ranges.

Close
This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

Close

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

View Article Abstract & Purchase Options

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Close