| Pipeline: megaDNA† | Protocol: Genome-wide prophage detection (Genome-wide prophage detection) Dataset: LAMBDA genome-wide prophage test | 0.595 F1 fraction · higher Uncertainty: Not reported Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible | Author-reported evaluation · Source checkedMethods, coverage and sourcemegaDNA†: Genome-wide prophage detection Scan complete genomes with overlapping windows and postprocess predictions into prophage regions. Genome-wide metrics are computed at region level and macro-averaged across genomes. Filtered gLM pipelines include normalization, smoothing, clustering and size filtering; these are not standalone encoder scores. 80 bacterial genomes,47 species,four phyla;386 annotated prophage locations. Aggregation: Not reported LAMBDA: A Prophage Detection Benchmark for Genomic Language Models · Table 5., row megaDNA†, column F1; XML row12 column6 |
|---|
| Pipeline: megaDNA† | Protocol: Genome-wide prophage detection (Genome-wide prophage detection) Dataset: LAMBDA genome-wide prophage test | 0.671 Recall fraction · higher Uncertainty: Not reported Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible | Author-reported evaluation · Source checkedMethods, coverage and sourcemegaDNA†: Genome-wide prophage detection Scan complete genomes with overlapping windows and postprocess predictions into prophage regions. Genome-wide metrics are computed at region level and macro-averaged across genomes. Filtered gLM pipelines include normalization, smoothing, clustering and size filtering; these are not standalone encoder scores. 80 bacterial genomes,47 species,four phyla;386 annotated prophage locations. Aggregation: Not reported LAMBDA: A Prophage Detection Benchmark for Genomic Language Models · Table 5., row megaDNA†, column Recall; XML row12 column3 |
|---|
| Pipeline: megaDNA† | Protocol: Genome-wide prophage detection (Genome-wide prophage detection) Dataset: LAMBDA genome-wide prophage test | 0.012 FPR fraction · lower Uncertainty: Not reported Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible | Author-reported evaluation · Source checkedMethods, coverage and sourcemegaDNA†: Genome-wide prophage detection Scan complete genomes with overlapping windows and postprocess predictions into prophage regions. Genome-wide metrics are computed at region level and macro-averaged across genomes. Filtered gLM pipelines include normalization, smoothing, clustering and size filtering; these are not standalone encoder scores. 80 bacterial genomes,47 species,four phyla;386 annotated prophage locations. Aggregation: Not reported LAMBDA: A Prophage Detection Benchmark for Genomic Language Models · Table 5., row megaDNA†, column FPR; XML row12 column5 |
|---|
| Pipeline: megaDNA† | Protocol: Genome-wide prophage detection (Genome-wide prophage detection) Dataset: LAMBDA genome-wide prophage test | 0.988 Specificity fraction · higher Uncertainty: Not reported Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible | Author-reported evaluation · Source checkedMethods, coverage and sourcemegaDNA†: Genome-wide prophage detection Scan complete genomes with overlapping windows and postprocess predictions into prophage regions. Genome-wide metrics are computed at region level and macro-averaged across genomes. Filtered gLM pipelines include normalization, smoothing, clustering and size filtering; these are not standalone encoder scores. 80 bacterial genomes,47 species,four phyla;386 annotated prophage locations. Aggregation: Not reported LAMBDA: A Prophage Detection Benchmark for Genomic Language Models · Table 5., row megaDNA†, column Specificity; XML row12 column4 |
|---|
| Pipeline: megaDNA† | Protocol: Genome-wide prophage detection (Genome-wide prophage detection) Dataset: LAMBDA genome-wide prophage test | 0.609 MCC unitless · higher Uncertainty: Not reported Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible | Author-reported evaluation · Source checkedMethods, coverage and sourcemegaDNA†: Genome-wide prophage detection Scan complete genomes with overlapping windows and postprocess predictions into prophage regions. Genome-wide metrics are computed at region level and macro-averaged across genomes. Filtered gLM pipelines include normalization, smoothing, clustering and size filtering; these are not standalone encoder scores. 80 bacterial genomes,47 species,four phyla;386 annotated prophage locations. Aggregation: Not reported LAMBDA: A Prophage Detection Benchmark for Genomic Language Models · Table 5., row megaDNA†, column MCC; XML row12 column7 |
|---|
| Pipeline: megaDNA† | Protocol: Genome-wide prophage detection (Genome-wide prophage detection) Dataset: LAMBDA genome-wide prophage test | 0.627 Precision fraction · higher Uncertainty: Not reported Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible | Author-reported evaluation · Source checkedMethods, coverage and sourcemegaDNA†: Genome-wide prophage detection Scan complete genomes with overlapping windows and postprocess predictions into prophage regions. Genome-wide metrics are computed at region level and macro-averaged across genomes. Filtered gLM pipelines include normalization, smoothing, clustering and size filtering; these are not standalone encoder scores. 80 bacterial genomes,47 species,four phyla;386 annotated prophage locations. Aggregation: Not reported LAMBDA: A Prophage Detection Benchmark for Genomic Language Models · Table 5., row megaDNA†, column Precision; XML row12 column2 |
|---|