(A) Run time for different sample numbers on a fixed set of genes using real data. (B) Run time for different numbers of genes (i.e., different numbers of triplets) on a fixed number of samples using real data. (TIFF)</p
The numbers in brackets highlight the number of successfully prepared pockets or the number of compa...
<p>The memory usage for all tools is based on a single overlap threshold or <i>k-mer</i> and is eval...
Top row corresponds to the run-times in seconds of different methods in scenario (S1) and scenario (...
<p>Time comparison among different software for densest genomic models tested in the study.</p
<p>Computational time is depicted as a function of genome size when setting the sample size to 50, a...
<p>Runtime comparisons between fetchGWI using plain and compressed index files, tagger, and megablas...
<p>Runtime comparisons between fetchGWI (using a compressed index file) and megablast. Each point is...
<p>Comparison of running time (seconds) of the algorithms implemented in MATLAB (upper section) and ...
<p>Runtime comparisons of fetchGWI when using either multiple index files, or a single, combined, in...
The comparison of the average running time of the examined methods for 150 experiments executed for ...
<p>A comparison of running times of TPA(FCED), RLA and RLA-CL on simulated data sets (generated with...
<p>Comparison of our approach and counterpart algorithms in terms of running time (<i>s</i>).</p
<p>Run time in seconds for a single complete iteration or subsample of the algorithm considering all...
<p>Shown are the results for (red), (green) and (blue), as well as for the full BHC method (black...
<p>Running times and prediction accuracies of the sub-quadratic algorithm tested with datasets of di...
The numbers in brackets highlight the number of successfully prepared pockets or the number of compa...
<p>The memory usage for all tools is based on a single overlap threshold or <i>k-mer</i> and is eval...
Top row corresponds to the run-times in seconds of different methods in scenario (S1) and scenario (...
<p>Time comparison among different software for densest genomic models tested in the study.</p
<p>Computational time is depicted as a function of genome size when setting the sample size to 50, a...
<p>Runtime comparisons between fetchGWI using plain and compressed index files, tagger, and megablas...
<p>Runtime comparisons between fetchGWI (using a compressed index file) and megablast. Each point is...
<p>Comparison of running time (seconds) of the algorithms implemented in MATLAB (upper section) and ...
<p>Runtime comparisons of fetchGWI when using either multiple index files, or a single, combined, in...
The comparison of the average running time of the examined methods for 150 experiments executed for ...
<p>A comparison of running times of TPA(FCED), RLA and RLA-CL on simulated data sets (generated with...
<p>Comparison of our approach and counterpart algorithms in terms of running time (<i>s</i>).</p
<p>Run time in seconds for a single complete iteration or subsample of the algorithm considering all...
<p>Shown are the results for (red), (green) and (blue), as well as for the full BHC method (black...
<p>Running times and prediction accuracies of the sub-quadratic algorithm tested with datasets of di...
The numbers in brackets highlight the number of successfully prepared pockets or the number of compa...
<p>The memory usage for all tools is based on a single overlap threshold or <i>k-mer</i> and is eval...
Top row corresponds to the run-times in seconds of different methods in scenario (S1) and scenario (...
DOI
Add to ORKG