CompaRNA - on-line benchmarks of RNA structure prediction methods
Home

Methods
Datasets
Rankings
RNA 2D Atlas

Help
FAQ

Contact us
RSS feeds
Twitter

Table of contents:

  1. Overview

  2. Performance Plots

  3. Performance of Carnac(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

  4. Performance of Mastr(seed) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

  5. Compile and download dataset for Carnac(20) & Mastr(seed) [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric Carnac(20) Mastr(seed)
MCC 0.696 > 0.000
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.652 ± 0.113 > 0.000 ± 0.000
Sensitivity 0.518 > 0.000
Positive Predictive Value 0.941 > 0.000
Total TP 380 > 0
Total TN 77735 < 78139
Total FP 75 > 0
Total FP CONTRA 6 > 0
Total FP INCONS 18 > 0
Total FP COMP 51 > 0
Total FN 353 < 733
P-value 5.1503931209e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of Carnac(20) and Mastr(seed). Positive Predictive Value (PPV) is plotted against sensitivity. Each dot represents a single test of each method. See tables below for raw data (individual counts for Carnac(20) and Mastr(seed)).

  2. Average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCC) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were plotted for different RNA families, for which at least 3 members were present in the benchmarking dataset. 'n' denotes the number of MCCs used to calculate the average and CI. See tables below for raw data (individual counts for Carnac(20) and Mastr(seed)).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for Carnac(20) and Mastr(seed). The whiskers correspond to 95% confidence intervals (CIs). 'n' denotes the number of MCCs used to calculate average MCCs and CIs. See tables below for raw data (individual counts for Carnac(20) and Mastr(seed)).

^top





Performance of Carnac(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Carnac(20)

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 380
Total TN 77735
Total FP 75
Total FP CONTRA 6
Total FP INCONS 18
Total FP COMP 51
Total FN 353
Total Scores
MCC 0.696
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.652 ± 0.113
Sensitivity 0.518
Positive Predictive Value 0.941
Nr of predictions 28

^top



2. Individual counts for Carnac(20) [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KDQ_B 0.77 0.60 1.00 6 168 0 0 0 0 4
2L94_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 357 0 0 0 0 18
2WRQ_Y 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 1143 14 0 0 14 0
2XKV_B 0.43 0.18 1.00 2 1833 1 0 0 1 9
2XQD_Y 0.87 0.76 1.00 16 1113 1 0 0 1 5
2XXA_G 0.29 0.09 1.00 3 2042 0 0 0 0 32
3A2K_C 0.88 0.77 1.00 17 1091 0 0 0 0 5
3AMU_B 0.79 0.79 0.79 15 1138 7 0 4 3 4
3G4S_9 0.73 0.54 1.00 14 2722 4 0 0 4 12
3GX2_A 0.68 0.46 1.00 13 1436 0 0 0 0 15
3IVN_B 0.91 0.83 1.00 19 884 0 0 0 0 4
3IZ4_A 0.52 0.31 0.88 29 25503 4 3 1 0 66
3IZF_C 0.91 0.83 1.00 29 2611 2 0 0 2 6
3JYV_7 0.81 0.70 0.93 14 1096 3 0 1 2 6
3JYX_4 0.76 0.58 1.00 7 4749 2 0 0 2 5
3JYX_3 0.83 0.80 0.86 12 2364 13 0 2 11 3
3LA5_A 0.91 0.84 1.00 21 933 0 0 0 0 4
3NPB_A 0.46 0.22 1.00 8 2270 3 0 0 3 29
3O58_2 0.93 0.87 1.00 27 2727 2 0 0 2 4
3O58_3 0.60 0.36 1.00 8 4756 1 0 0 1 14
3PDR_A 0.75 0.58 0.97 29 4810 3 1 0 2 21
3RKF_A 0.91 0.83 1.00 20 846 0 0 0 0 4
3SD1_A 0.72 0.55 0.94 16 1516 1 0 1 0 13
4A1C_2 0.42 0.25 0.71 5 4509 3 0 2 1 15
4A1C_3 0.79 0.73 0.87 27 2732 5 0 4 1 10
4AOB_A 0.59 0.48 0.74 14 1418 6 2 3 1 15
4ENB_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 472 0 0 0 0 15
4ENC_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 496 0 0 0 0 15

^top



Performance of Mastr(seed) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Mastr(seed)

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 0
Total TN 78139
Total FP 0
Total FP CONTRA 0
Total FP INCONS 0
Total FP COMP 0
Total FN 733
Total Scores
MCC 0.000
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.000 ± 0.000
Sensitivity 0.000
Positive Predictive Value 0.000
Nr of predictions 28

^top



2. Individual counts for Mastr(seed) [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KDQ_B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 174 0 0 0 0 10
2L94_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 357 0 0 0 0 18
2WRQ_Y 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1152 0 0 0 0 9
2XKV_B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1835 0 0 0 0 11
2XQD_Y 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1129 0 0 0 0 21
2XXA_G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2045 0 0 0 0 35
3A2K_C 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1108 0 0 0 0 22
3AMU_B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1157 0 0 0 0 19
3G4S_9 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2736 0 0 0 0 26
3GX2_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1449 0 0 0 0 28
3IVN_B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 903 0 0 0 0 23
3IZ4_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 25536 0 0 0 0 95
3IZF_C 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2640 0 0 0 0 35
3JYV_7 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1111 0 0 0 0 20
3JYX_4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 4756 0 0 0 0 12
3JYX_3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2378 0 0 0 0 15
3LA5_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 954 0 0 0 0 25
3NPB_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2278 0 0 0 0 37
3O58_2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2754 0 0 0 0 31
3O58_3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 4764 0 0 0 0 22
3PDR_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 4840 0 0 0 0 50
3RKF_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 866 0 0 0 0 24
3SD1_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1533 0 0 0 0 29
4A1C_2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 4516 0 0 0 0 20
4A1C_3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2763 0 0 0 0 37
4AOB_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1437 0 0 0 0 29
4ENB_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 472 0 0 0 0 15
4ENC_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 496 0 0 0 0 15

^top


Matthews Correlation Coeffient, Sensitivity and Positive Predictive Value have been calculated based on the paper by Gardener & Giegerich, 2004.