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 Mastr(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric Mastr(20) Pknots
MCC 0.682 > 0.639
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.641 ± 0.133 < 0.685 ± 0.120
Sensitivity 0.555 < 0.683
Positive Predictive Value 0.845 > 0.606
Total TP 354 < 436
Total TN 52184 > 51884
Total FP 137 < 379
Total FP CONTRA 12 < 104
Total FP INCONS 53 < 179
Total FP COMP 72 < 96
Total FN 284 > 202
P-value 5.1503931209e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of Mastr(20) and Pknots. 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 Mastr(20) and Pknots).

  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 Mastr(20) and Pknots).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for Mastr(20) and Pknots. 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 Mastr(20) and Pknots).

^top





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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 354
Total TN 52184
Total FP 137
Total FP CONTRA 12
Total FP INCONS 53
Total FP COMP 72
Total FN 284
Total Scores
MCC 0.682
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.641 ± 0.133
Sensitivity 0.555
Positive Predictive Value 0.845
Nr of predictions 27

^top



2. Individual counts for Mastr(20) [ 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 0.88 0.83 0.94 15 341 2 0 1 1 3
2WRQ_Y 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 1143 13 0 0 13 0
2XKV_B 0.60 0.36 1.00 4 1831 3 0 0 3 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 0 0 0 0 28
3A2K_C 0.81 0.77 0.85 17 1088 3 0 3 0 5
3AMU_B 0.89 0.79 1.00 15 1142 2 0 0 2 4
3G4S_9 0.68 0.62 0.76 16 2715 10 2 3 5 10
3GX2_A 0.46 0.39 0.55 11 1429 10 2 7 1 17
3IVN_B 0.86 0.83 0.90 19 882 2 2 0 0 4
3IZF_C 0.91 0.91 0.91 32 2605 9 0 3 6 3
3JYV_7 0.97 0.95 1.00 19 1092 2 0 0 2 1
3JYX_3 0.77 0.80 0.75 12 2362 26 0 4 22 3
3JYX_4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 4756 0 0 0 0 12
3LA5_A 0.89 0.80 1.00 20 934 0 0 0 0 5
3NPB_A 0.34 0.30 0.41 11 2251 18 1 15 2 26
3O58_2 0.93 0.94 0.94 29 2723 12 0 2 10 2
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 0.84 0.71 1.00 17 849 0 0 0 0 7
3SD1_A 0.73 0.72 0.75 21 1505 7 4 3 0 8
4A1C_3 0.88 0.86 0.89 32 2727 7 0 4 3 5
4A1C_2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 4516 0 0 0 0 20
4AOB_A 0.42 0.34 0.53 10 1418 10 1 8 1 19
4ENB_A 0.44 0.20 1.00 3 469 0 0 0 0 12
4ENC_A 0.57 0.33 1.00 5 491 0 0 0 0 10

^top



Performance of Pknots - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Pknots

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 436
Total TN 51884
Total FP 379
Total FP CONTRA 104
Total FP INCONS 179
Total FP COMP 96
Total FN 202
Total Scores
MCC 0.639
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.685 ± 0.120
Sensitivity 0.683
Positive Predictive Value 0.606
Nr of predictions 27

^top



2. Individual counts for Pknots [ 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 0.94 0.94 0.94 17 339 2 0 1 1 1
2WRQ_Y 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 1143 13 0 0 13 0
2XKV_B 0.21 0.27 0.17 3 1817 33 3 12 18 8
2XQD_Y 0.98 0.95 1.00 20 1109 1 0 0 1 1
2XXA_G 0.32 0.34 0.32 12 2008 26 1 24 1 23
3A2K_C 0.50 0.55 0.48 12 1083 13 3 10 0 10
3AMU_B 1.00 1.00 1.00 19 1138 3 0 0 3 0
3G4S_9 0.37 0.46 0.31 12 2697 27 14 13 0 14
3GX2_A 0.55 0.57 0.55 16 1420 14 4 9 1 12
3IVN_B 0.91 0.87 0.95 20 882 1 0 1 0 3
3IZF_C 0.89 0.91 0.86 32 2603 9 0 5 4 3
3JYV_7 0.97 0.95 1.00 19 1092 2 0 0 2 1
3JYX_3 0.37 0.53 0.27 8 2348 26 17 5 4 7
3JYX_4 0.33 0.58 0.19 7 4720 41 22 7 12 5
3LA5_A 0.94 0.88 1.00 22 932 0 0 0 0 3
3NPB_A 0.84 0.81 0.88 30 2244 9 0 4 5 7
3O58_2 0.93 0.90 0.97 28 2725 3 0 1 2 3
3O58_3 0.32 0.45 0.24 10 4722 39 18 14 7 12
3PDR_A 0.64 0.64 0.65 32 4791 19 4 13 2 18
3RKF_A 0.91 0.88 0.95 21 844 1 0 1 0 3
3SD1_A 0.78 0.76 0.81 22 1506 5 1 4 0 7
4A1C_3 0.28 0.30 0.28 11 2723 30 4 25 1 26
4A1C_2 0.33 0.40 0.29 8 4488 36 9 11 16 12
4AOB_A 0.19 0.21 0.21 6 1409 23 3 19 1 23
4ENB_A 1.00 1.00 1.00 15 457 2 0 0 2 0
4ENC_A 0.97 1.00 0.94 15 480 1 1 0 0 0

^top


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