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 RNAshapes - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

  4. Performance of Mastr(20) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric RNAshapes Mastr(20)
MCC 0.699 > 0.636
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.712 ± 0.097 > 0.618 ± 0.136
Sensitivity 0.704 > 0.483
Positive Predictive Value 0.699 < 0.845
Total TP 516 > 354
Total TN 77401 < 77720
Total FP 378 > 137
Total FP CONTRA 62 > 12
Total FP INCONS 160 > 53
Total FP COMP 156 > 72
Total FN 217 < 379
P-value 3.56938820447e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

  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 RNAshapes and Mastr(20)).

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

^top





Performance of RNAshapes - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNAshapes

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 516
Total TN 77401
Total FP 378
Total FP CONTRA 62
Total FP INCONS 160
Total FP COMP 156
Total FN 217
Total Scores
MCC 0.699
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.712 ± 0.097
Sensitivity 0.704
Positive Predictive Value 0.699
Nr of predictions 28

^top



2. Individual counts for RNAshapes [ 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 24 0 6 18 3
2XQD_Y 0.70 0.67 0.74 14 1110 6 0 5 1 7
2XXA_G 1.00 1.00 1.00 35 2010 1 0 0 1 0
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 0.58 0.58 0.60 15 2711 19 2 8 9 11
3GX2_A 0.91 0.89 0.93 25 1422 3 1 1 1 3
3IVN_B 0.91 0.83 1.00 19 884 0 0 0 0 4
3IZ4_A 0.57 0.58 0.56 55 25437 50 16 28 6 40
3IZF_C 0.76 0.77 0.75 27 2604 14 0 9 5 8
3JYV_7 -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 1092 20 1 18 1 20
3JYX_3 0.77 0.80 0.75 12 2362 26 0 4 22 3
3JYX_4 0.61 0.83 0.45 10 4734 35 10 2 23 2
3LA5_A 0.89 0.80 1.00 20 934 0 0 0 0 5
3NPB_A 0.84 0.76 0.93 28 2248 5 1 1 3 9
3O58_2 0.73 0.74 0.72 23 2722 18 0 9 9 8
3O58_3 0.41 0.50 0.34 11 4732 38 6 15 17 11
3PDR_A 0.80 0.80 0.80 40 4790 12 3 7 2 10
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 0.86 0.84 0.89 31 2728 7 0 4 3 6
4A1C_2 0.19 0.25 0.16 5 4484 41 11 16 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



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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 354
Total TN 77720
Total FP 137
Total FP CONTRA 12
Total FP INCONS 53
Total FP COMP 72
Total FN 379
Total Scores
MCC 0.636
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.618 ± 0.136
Sensitivity 0.483
Positive Predictive Value 0.845
Nr of predictions 28

^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
3IZ4_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 25536 0 0 0 0 95
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


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