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 Murlet(seed) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric RNAshapes Murlet(seed)
MCC 0.803 > 0.620
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.810 ± 0.090 > 0.616 ± 0.071
Sensitivity 0.803 > 0.442
Positive Predictive Value 0.809 < 0.879
Total TP 474 > 261
Total TN 38961 < 39250
Total FP 199 > 49
Total FP CONTRA 40 > 4
Total FP INCONS 72 > 32
Total FP COMP 87 > 13
Total FN 116 < 329
P-value 5.19332990918e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of RNAshapes and Murlet(seed). 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 Murlet(seed)).

  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 Murlet(seed)).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for RNAshapes and Murlet(seed). 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 Murlet(seed)).

^top





Performance of RNAshapes - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNAshapes

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 474
Total TN 38961
Total FP 199
Total FP CONTRA 40
Total FP INCONS 72
Total FP COMP 87
Total FN 116
Total Scores
MCC 0.803
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.810 ± 0.090
Sensitivity 0.803
Positive Predictive Value 0.809
Nr of predictions 26

^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
2KE6_A 1.00 1.00 1.00 18 449 1 0 0 1 0
2KUR_A 1.00 1.00 1.00 19 448 0 0 0 0 0
2KUU_A 1.00 1.00 1.00 18 429 1 0 0 1 0
2KUV_A 1.00 1.00 1.00 19 420 0 0 0 0 0
2KUW_A 1.00 1.00 1.00 18 452 1 0 0 1 0
2L1F_A 0.89 0.87 0.91 20 741 2 0 2 0 3
2L1F_B 0.98 0.96 1.00 23 768 0 0 0 0 1
2L94_A 1.00 1.00 1.00 18 339 1 0 0 1 0
2LC8_A 0.64 0.61 0.69 11 512 5 0 5 0 7
2XKV_B 0.64 0.73 0.57 8 1821 24 0 6 18 3
2XXA_G 1.00 1.00 1.00 35 2010 1 0 0 1 0
3A3A_A 0.84 0.80 0.89 24 1473 3 0 3 0 6
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
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_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_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 Murlet(seed) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Murlet(seed)

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 261
Total TN 39250
Total FP 49
Total FP CONTRA 4
Total FP INCONS 32
Total FP COMP 13
Total FN 329
Total Scores
MCC 0.620
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.616 ± 0.071
Sensitivity 0.442
Positive Predictive Value 0.879
Nr of predictions 26

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KDQ_B 0.54 0.30 1.00 3 171 0 0 0 0 7
2KE6_A 0.67 0.56 0.83 10 455 2 0 2 0 8
2KUR_A 0.65 0.53 0.83 10 455 2 0 2 0 9
2KUU_A 0.67 0.56 0.83 10 435 2 0 2 0 8
2KUV_A 0.91 0.84 1.00 16 423 0 0 0 0 3
2KUW_A 0.88 0.83 0.94 15 454 2 0 1 1 3
2L1F_A 0.83 0.78 0.90 18 743 2 0 2 0 5
2L1F_B 0.82 0.75 0.90 18 771 2 0 2 0 6
2L94_A 0.57 0.39 0.88 7 349 2 0 1 1 11
2LC8_A -0.03 0.00 0.00 0 516 12 0 12 0 18
2XKV_B 0.60 0.36 1.00 4 1831 2 0 0 2 7
2XXA_G 0.41 0.17 1.00 6 2039 0 0 0 0 29
3A3A_A 0.63 0.40 1.00 12 1488 0 0 0 0 18
3GX2_A 0.70 0.50 1.00 14 1435 1 0 0 1 14
3IVN_B 0.62 0.52 0.75 12 887 4 2 2 0 11
3JYX_4 0.50 0.25 1.00 3 4753 4 0 0 4 9
3LA5_A 0.67 0.56 0.82 14 937 3 1 2 0 11
3NPB_A 0.59 0.35 1.00 13 2265 2 0 0 2 24
3O58_3 0.52 0.27 1.00 6 4758 1 0 0 1 16
3PDR_A 0.53 0.28 1.00 14 4826 0 0 0 0 36
3RKF_A 0.62 0.50 0.80 12 851 3 1 2 0 12
3SD1_A 0.56 0.38 0.85 11 1520 2 0 2 0 18
4A1C_2 0.59 0.35 1.00 7 4509 0 0 0 0 13
4AOB_A 0.69 0.48 1.00 14 1423 1 0 0 1 15
4ENB_A 0.63 0.40 1.00 6 466 0 0 0 0 9
4ENC_A 0.63 0.40 1.00 6 490 0 0 0 0 9

^top


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