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 PETfold_pre2.0(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

  5. Compile and download dataset for PETfold_pre2.0(seed) & RNASLOpt [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric PETfold_pre2.0(seed) RNASLOpt
MCC 0.828 > 0.560
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.777 ± 0.178 > 0.582 ± 0.174
Sensitivity 0.772 > 0.526
Positive Predictive Value 0.892 > 0.608
Total TP 132 > 90
Total TN 12516 = 12516
Total FP 42 < 72
Total FP CONTRA 3 < 18
Total FP INCONS 13 < 40
Total FP COMP 26 > 14
Total FN 39 < 81
P-value 0.0

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of PETfold_pre2.0(seed) and RNASLOpt. 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 PETfold_pre2.0(seed) and RNASLOpt).

  2. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for PETfold_pre2.0(seed) and RNASLOpt. 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 PETfold_pre2.0(seed) and RNASLOpt).

^top





Performance of PETfold_pre2.0(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for PETfold_pre2.0(seed)

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 132
Total TN 12516
Total FP 42
Total FP CONTRA 3
Total FP INCONS 13
Total FP COMP 26
Total FN 39
Total Scores
MCC 0.828
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.777 ± 0.178
Sensitivity 0.772
Positive Predictive Value 0.892
Nr of predictions 8

^top



2. Individual counts for PETfold_pre2.0(seed) [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.41 0.33 0.55 6 517 5 0 5 0 12
3J16_L 1.00 1.00 1.00 21 1138 1 0 0 1 0
3UZL_B 0.93 0.88 1.00 14 1279 8 0 0 8 2
4A1C_3 1.00 1.00 1.00 37 2726 2 0 0 2 0
4A1C_2 0.79 0.75 0.83 15 4498 12 1 2 9 5
4AOB_A 0.85 0.79 0.92 23 1412 4 0 2 2 6
4ENB_A 0.61 0.53 0.73 8 461 5 1 2 2 7
4ENC_A 0.61 0.53 0.73 8 485 5 1 2 2 7

^top



Performance of RNASLOpt - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNASLOpt

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 90
Total TN 12516
Total FP 72
Total FP CONTRA 18
Total FP INCONS 40
Total FP COMP 14
Total FN 81
Total Scores
MCC 0.560
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.582 ± 0.174
Sensitivity 0.526
Positive Predictive Value 0.608
Nr of predictions 8

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.48 0.39 0.64 7 517 4 0 4 0 11
3J16_L 0.63 0.57 0.71 12 1142 5 0 5 0 9
3UZL_B 0.55 0.50 0.62 8 1280 9 1 4 4 8
4A1C_3 0.79 0.73 0.87 27 2732 5 0 4 1 10
4A1C_2 0.30 0.40 0.24 8 4482 35 13 13 9 12
4AOB_A 0.31 0.28 0.38 8 1416 13 3 10 0 21
4ENB_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 461 0 0 0 0 4
4ENC_A 0.73 0.60 0.90 9 486 1 1 0 0 6

^top


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