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 RNAalifold(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric RNAalifold(20) RNAsubopt
MCC 0.782 > 0.663
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.772 ± 0.081 > 0.680 ± 0.104
Sensitivity 0.690 > 0.686
Positive Predictive Value 0.889 > 0.647
Total TP 506 > 503
Total TN 77570 > 77362
Total FP 148 < 407
Total FP CONTRA 21 < 94
Total FP INCONS 42 < 180
Total FP COMP 85 < 133
Total FN 227 < 230
P-value 5.23657817852e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

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

^top





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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 506
Total TN 77570
Total FP 148
Total FP CONTRA 21
Total FP INCONS 42
Total FP COMP 85
Total FN 227
Total Scores
MCC 0.782
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.772 ± 0.081
Sensitivity 0.690
Positive Predictive Value 0.889
Nr of predictions 28

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KDQ_B 0.62 0.40 1.00 4 170 0 0 0 0 6
2L94_A 0.51 0.50 0.56 9 341 8 0 7 1 9
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 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 0.98 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
3G4S_9 0.96 0.92 1.00 24 2712 7 0 0 7 2
3GX2_A 0.92 0.86 1.00 24 1425 1 0 0 1 4
3IVN_B 0.86 0.78 0.95 18 884 1 1 0 0 5
3IZ4_A 0.65 0.48 0.87 46 25483 15 4 3 8 49
3IZF_C 0.90 0.89 0.91 31 2606 6 0 3 3 4
3JYV_7 0.97 0.95 1.00 19 1092 2 0 0 2 1
3JYX_3 0.76 0.73 0.79 11 2364 20 0 3 17 4
3JYX_4 0.77 0.83 0.71 10 4742 15 3 1 11 2
3LA5_A 0.87 0.76 1.00 19 935 0 0 0 0 6
3NPB_A 0.75 0.57 1.00 21 2257 4 0 0 4 16
3O58_2 0.97 0.94 1.00 29 2725 7 0 0 7 2
3O58_3 0.42 0.36 0.50 8 4748 9 3 5 1 14
3PDR_A 0.92 0.88 0.96 44 4794 3 1 1 1 6
3RKF_A 0.81 0.71 0.94 17 848 1 0 1 0 7
3SD1_A 0.84 0.86 0.83 25 1503 5 4 1 0 4
4A1C_3 0.90 0.84 0.97 31 2731 1 0 1 0 6
4A1C_2 0.22 0.25 0.19 5 4490 23 5 16 2 15
4AOB_A 0.85 0.72 1.00 21 1416 2 0 0 2 8
4ENB_A 0.51 0.27 1.00 4 468 0 0 0 0 11
4ENC_A 0.63 0.40 1.00 6 490 0 0 0 0 9

^top



Performance of RNAsubopt - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNAsubopt

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 503
Total TN 77362
Total FP 407
Total FP CONTRA 94
Total FP INCONS 180
Total FP COMP 133
Total FN 230
Total Scores
MCC 0.663
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.680 ± 0.104
Sensitivity 0.686
Positive Predictive Value 0.647
Nr of predictions 28

^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
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 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
3G4S_9 0.41 0.46 0.38 12 2704 25 7 13 5 14
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_3 0.85 0.84 0.86 31 2727 8 0 5 3 6
4A1C_2 0.18 0.25 0.14 5 4481 43 13 17 13 15
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.