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 RSpredict(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

  4. Performance of Vsfold5 - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

  5. Compile and download dataset for RSpredict(20) & Vsfold5 [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric RSpredict(20) Vsfold5
MCC 0.663 > 0.500
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.653 ± 0.116 > 0.556 ± 0.146
Sensitivity 0.593 > 0.501
Positive Predictive Value 0.748 > 0.509
Total TP 419 > 354
Total TN 74843 > 74707
Total FP 230 < 430
Total FP CONTRA 61 < 93
Total FP INCONS 80 < 249
Total FP COMP 89 > 88
Total FN 288 < 353
P-value 5.1503931209e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of RSpredict(20) and Vsfold5. 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 RSpredict(20) and Vsfold5).

  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 RSpredict(20) and Vsfold5).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for RSpredict(20) and Vsfold5. 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 RSpredict(20) and Vsfold5).

^top





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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 419
Total TN 74843
Total FP 230
Total FP CONTRA 61
Total FP INCONS 80
Total FP COMP 89
Total FN 288
Total Scores
MCC 0.663
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.653 ± 0.116
Sensitivity 0.593
Positive Predictive Value 0.748
Nr of predictions 27

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KDQ_B 0.89 0.80 1.00 8 166 0 0 0 0 2
2L94_A 0.53 0.50 0.60 9 342 7 0 6 1 9
2WRQ_Y 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 1143 12 0 0 12 0
2XKV_B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1831 4 1 3 0 11
2XQD_Y 0.98 0.95 1.00 20 1109 1 0 0 1 1
2XXA_G 0.50 0.26 1.00 9 2036 0 0 0 0 26
3A2K_C 0.88 0.86 0.90 19 1087 2 0 2 0 3
3AMU_B 0.69 0.53 0.91 10 1146 2 0 1 1 9
3GX2_A 0.40 0.21 0.75 6 1441 2 1 1 0 22
3IVN_B 0.91 0.87 0.95 20 882 1 1 0 0 3
3IZ4_A 0.61 0.57 0.67 54 25455 38 13 14 11 41
3IZF_C 0.94 0.91 0.97 32 2607 4 0 1 3 3
3JYV_7 0.97 0.95 1.00 19 1092 2 0 0 2 1
3JYX_3 0.80 0.80 0.80 12 2363 16 0 3 13 3
3JYX_4 0.59 0.75 0.47 9 4737 33 9 1 23 3
3LA5_A 0.89 0.80 1.00 20 934 0 0 0 0 5
3NPB_A -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 2272 6 1 5 0 37
3O58_2 0.93 0.94 0.94 29 2723 10 0 2 8 2
3O58_3 0.38 0.50 0.30 11 4727 29 15 11 3 11
3PDR_A 0.80 0.70 0.92 35 4802 5 1 2 2 15
3RKF_A 0.91 0.88 0.95 21 844 1 1 0 0 3
3SD1_A 0.82 0.86 0.78 25 1501 7 5 2 0 4
4A1C_2 0.25 0.30 0.21 6 4487 30 12 11 7 14
4A1C_3 0.60 0.49 0.75 18 2739 8 0 6 2 19
4AOB_A 0.33 0.21 0.55 6 1426 5 1 4 0 23
4ENB_A 0.54 0.40 0.75 6 464 2 0 2 0 9
4ENC_A 0.51 0.40 0.67 6 487 3 0 3 0 9

^top



Performance of Vsfold5 - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Vsfold5

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 354
Total TN 74707
Total FP 430
Total FP CONTRA 93
Total FP INCONS 249
Total FP COMP 88
Total FN 353
Total Scores
MCC 0.500
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.556 ± 0.146
Sensitivity 0.501
Positive Predictive Value 0.509
Nr of predictions 27

^top



2. Individual counts for Vsfold5 [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KDQ_B 0.95 0.90 1.00 9 165 0 0 0 0 1
2L94_A 0.97 0.94 1.00 17 340 1 0 0 1 1
2WRQ_Y 0.94 0.89 1.00 8 1144 13 0 0 13 1
2XKV_B -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1803 32 17 15 0 11
2XQD_Y 0.95 0.90 1.00 19 1110 1 0 0 1 2
2XXA_G -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 2014 31 2 29 0 35
3A2K_C 0.95 0.91 1.00 20 1088 0 0 0 0 2
3AMU_B 0.77 0.79 0.75 15 1137 8 0 5 3 4
3GX2_A 0.61 0.57 0.67 16 1425 9 0 8 1 12
3IVN_B 0.88 0.78 1.00 18 885 0 0 0 0 5
3IZ4_A 0.31 0.31 0.33 29 25448 65 14 45 6 66
3IZF_C 0.85 0.83 0.88 29 2607 5 0 4 1 6
3JYV_7 -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 1092 19 4 15 0 20
3JYX_3 0.12 0.13 0.11 2 2360 20 6 10 4 13
3JYX_4 0.63 0.83 0.48 10 4735 32 9 2 21 2
3LA5_A -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 938 16 0 16 0 25
3NPB_A 0.62 0.54 0.71 20 2250 10 1 7 2 17
3O58_2 0.50 0.52 0.50 16 2722 19 3 13 3 15
3O58_3 0.51 0.59 0.45 13 4735 28 11 5 12 9
3PDR_A 0.69 0.64 0.74 32 4797 13 3 8 2 18
3RKF_A 0.90 0.92 0.88 22 841 3 3 0 0 2
3SD1_A 0.13 0.14 0.15 4 1507 22 5 17 0 25
4A1C_2 0.33 0.40 0.28 8 4487 37 8 13 16 12
4A1C_3 0.29 0.30 0.31 11 2727 26 4 21 1 26
4AOB_A 0.21 0.21 0.25 6 1413 19 2 16 1 23
4ENB_A 1.00 1.00 1.00 15 457 0 0 0 0 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.