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 CentroidAlifold(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

  4. Performance of RNAsubopt - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric CentroidAlifold(20) RNAsubopt
MCC 0.810 > 0.669
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.802 ± 0.071 > 0.679 ± 0.107
Sensitivity 0.716 > 0.690
Positive Predictive Value 0.921 > 0.654
Total TP 499 > 481
Total TN 74687 > 74494
Total FP 122 < 382
Total FP CONTRA 21 < 87
Total FP INCONS 22 < 167
Total FP COMP 79 < 128
Total FN 198 < 216
P-value 5.10776592382e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of CentroidAlifold(20) and RNAsubopt. 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 CentroidAlifold(20) and RNAsubopt).

  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 CentroidAlifold(20) and RNAsubopt).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for CentroidAlifold(20) and RNAsubopt. 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 CentroidAlifold(20) and RNAsubopt).

^top





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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 499
Total TN 74687
Total FP 122
Total FP CONTRA 21
Total FP INCONS 22
Total FP COMP 79
Total FN 198
Total Scores
MCC 0.810
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.802 ± 0.071
Sensitivity 0.716
Positive Predictive Value 0.921
Nr of predictions 26

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2L94_A 0.59 0.56 0.67 10 342 6 0 5 1 8
2WRQ_Y 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 1143 12 0 0 12 0
2XKV_B 0.60 0.36 1.00 4 1831 7 0 0 7 7
2XQD_Y 0.98 0.95 1.00 20 1109 1 0 0 1 1
2XXA_G 0.44 0.20 1.00 7 2038 4 0 0 4 28
3A2K_C 0.98 0.95 1.00 21 1087 0 0 0 0 1
3AMU_B 1.00 1.00 1.00 19 1138 2 0 0 2 0
3GX2_A 0.92 0.86 1.00 24 1425 1 0 0 1 4
3IVN_B 0.86 0.83 0.90 19 882 2 2 0 0 4
3IZ4_A 0.67 0.52 0.88 49 25480 9 7 0 2 46
3IZF_C 0.91 0.89 0.94 31 2607 6 0 2 4 4
3JYV_7 0.97 0.95 1.00 19 1092 2 0 0 2 1
3JYX_3 0.80 0.80 0.80 12 2363 23 0 3 20 3
3JYX_4 0.67 0.75 0.60 9 4741 9 5 1 3 3
3LA5_A 0.87 0.80 0.95 20 933 1 1 0 0 5
3NPB_A 0.77 0.65 0.92 24 2252 6 1 1 4 13
3O58_2 0.93 0.94 0.94 29 2723 9 0 2 7 2
3O58_3 0.64 0.45 0.91 10 4753 2 1 0 1 12
3PDR_A 0.92 0.90 0.94 45 4792 5 1 2 2 5
3RKF_A 0.86 0.75 1.00 18 848 0 0 0 0 6
3SD1_A 0.85 0.76 0.96 22 1510 1 0 1 0 7
4A1C_2 0.33 0.25 0.45 5 4505 8 3 3 2 15
4A1C_3 0.93 0.92 0.94 34 2727 4 0 2 2 3
4AOB_A 0.89 0.79 1.00 23 1414 2 0 0 2 6
4ENB_A 0.77 0.60 1.00 9 463 0 0 0 0 6
4ENC_A 0.68 0.47 1.00 7 489 0 0 0 0 8

^top



Performance of RNAsubopt - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNAsubopt

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 481
Total TN 74494
Total FP 382
Total FP CONTRA 87
Total FP INCONS 167
Total FP COMP 128
Total FN 216
Total Scores
MCC 0.669
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.679 ± 0.107
Sensitivity 0.690
Positive Predictive Value 0.654
Nr of predictions 26

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
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 13 0 0 13 0
2XKV_B 0.64 0.73 0.57 8 1821 25 0 6 19 3
2XQD_Y 0.83 0.81 0.85 17 1109 4 0 3 1 4
2XXA_G 0.49 0.49 0.52 17 2012 17 1 15 1 18
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
3GX2_A 0.53 0.54 0.54 15 1421 14 4 9 1 13
3IVN_B 0.88 0.78 1.00 18 885 0 0 0 0 5
3IZ4_A 0.56 0.60 0.53 57 25429 54 26 24 4 38
3IZF_C 0.89 0.91 0.86 32 2603 9 0 5 4 3
3JYV_7 -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 1090 21 4 17 0 20
3JYX_3 0.77 0.80 0.75 12 2362 26 0 4 22 3
3JYX_4 0.34 0.58 0.21 7 4722 38 20 7 11 5
3LA5_A 0.91 0.84 1.00 21 933 0 0 0 0 4
3NPB_A 0.84 0.78 0.91 29 2246 8 0 3 5 8
3O58_2 0.87 0.90 0.85 28 2721 13 0 5 8 3
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 0.73 0.72 0.75 21 1505 7 4 3 0 8
4A1C_2 0.18 0.25 0.14 5 4481 43 13 17 13 15
4A1C_3 0.85 0.84 0.86 31 2727 8 0 5 3 6
4AOB_A 0.62 0.62 0.64 18 1409 11 4 6 1 11
4ENB_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 461 2 0 0 2 4
4ENC_A 0.36 0.33 0.42 5 484 7 0 7 0 10

^top


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