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 RNAfold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric Carnac(20) RNAfold
MCC 0.696 > 0.687
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.652 ± 0.113 < 0.708 ± 0.101
Sensitivity 0.518 < 0.701
Positive Predictive Value 0.941 > 0.678
Total TP 380 < 514
Total TN 77735 > 77381
Total FP 75 < 394
Total FP CONTRA 6 < 76
Total FP INCONS 18 < 168
Total FP COMP 51 < 150
Total FN 353 > 219
P-value 2.66698692294e-05

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of Carnac(20) and RNAfold. 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 RNAfold).

  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 RNAfold).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for Carnac(20) and RNAfold. 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 RNAfold).

^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_3 0.83 0.80 0.86 12 2364 13 0 2 11 3
3JYX_4 0.76 0.58 1.00 7 4749 2 0 0 2 5
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_3 0.79 0.73 0.87 27 2732 5 0 4 1 10
4A1C_2 0.42 0.25 0.71 5 4509 3 0 2 1 15
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 RNAfold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNAfold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 514
Total TN 77381
Total FP 394
Total FP CONTRA 76
Total FP INCONS 168
Total FP COMP 150
Total FN 219
Total Scores
MCC 0.687
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.708 ± 0.101
Sensitivity 0.701
Positive Predictive Value 0.678
Nr of predictions 28

^top



2. Individual counts for RNAfold [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KDQ_B 1.00 1.00 1.00 10 164 0 0 0 0 0
2L94_A 1.00 1.00 1.00 18 339 1 0 0 1 0
2WRQ_Y 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 1143 14 0 0 14 0
2XKV_B 0.64 0.73 0.57 8 1821 25 0 6 19 3
2XQD_Y 0.98 0.95 1.00 20 1109 1 0 0 1 1
2XXA_G 0.35 0.34 0.38 12 2013 21 1 19 1 23
3A2K_C 0.47 0.50 0.46 11 1084 13 3 10 0 11
3AMU_B 0.81 0.79 0.83 15 1139 6 0 3 3 4
3G4S_9 0.78 0.77 0.80 20 2711 12 2 3 7 6
3GX2_A 0.81 0.79 0.85 22 1423 5 2 2 1 6
3IVN_B 0.91 0.83 1.00 19 884 0 0 0 0 4
3IZ4_A 0.56 0.60 0.52 57 25426 57 26 27 4 38
3IZF_C 0.75 0.77 0.73 27 2603 15 0 10 5 8
3JYV_7 -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 1089 22 4 18 0 20
3JYX_3 0.77 0.80 0.75 12 2362 27 0 4 23 3
3JYX_4 0.61 0.83 0.45 10 4734 33 10 2 21 2
3LA5_A 0.91 0.84 1.00 21 933 0 0 0 0 4
3NPB_A 0.91 0.86 0.97 32 2245 5 1 0 4 5
3O58_2 0.72 0.74 0.70 23 2721 19 0 10 9 8
3O58_3 0.41 0.50 0.34 11 4732 35 6 15 14 11
3PDR_A 0.90 0.90 0.90 45 4790 7 2 3 2 5
3RKF_A 0.91 0.83 1.00 20 846 0 0 0 0 4
3SD1_A 0.77 0.76 0.79 22 1505 6 4 2 0 7
4A1C_3 0.88 0.86 0.89 32 2727 7 0 4 3 5
4A1C_2 0.19 0.25 0.15 5 4482 43 11 18 14 15
4AOB_A 0.60 0.59 0.63 17 1410 11 4 6 1 12
4ENB_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 461 2 0 0 2 4
4ENC_A 0.37 0.33 0.45 5 485 7 0 6 1 10

^top


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