Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 1 Area under ROC (TPR vs. FPR) and precision-recall (PPV vs. TPR) curves for off-target scoring methods when benchmarked with the Haeussler dataset [11], allowing up to six mismatches, and NGG, NAG, and NGA PAM sequences for off-targeting

From: CRISPR-Cas9 off-targeting assessment with nucleic acid duplex energy parameters

   Off-target scoring method
Area   CRISPRoff Elevation CFD MIT Cropit CCTop VfoldCAS
ROC   .98 .96 .96 .96 .91 .88 .80
PR   .18 .08 .08 .12 .05 .06 .01
TPR         
.9 FPR .06 .11 .11 .13 .27 .34 .44
.95   .11 .17 .17 .21 .33 .44 .63
.99   .32 .88 .88 .44 .71 .74 .84
1   .73 .97 .97 .96 .99 .91 .96
FPR         
.01 TPR .67 .52 .52 .59 .36 .31 .18
.05   .89 .80 .80 .79 .49 .50 .39
.1   .94 .89 .89 .87 .71 .61 .48
  1. Corresponding TPR and FPR performance of the methods are also given for some fixed FPR and TPR values. Best performances are given in bold