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 Sfold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric Sfold RSpredict(20)
MCC 0.710 > 0.663
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.722 ± 0.097 > 0.653 ± 0.116
Sensitivity 0.686 > 0.593
Positive Predictive Value 0.739 < 0.748
Total TP 485 > 419
Total TN 74747 < 74843
Total FP 288 > 230
Total FP CONTRA 46 < 61
Total FP INCONS 125 > 80
Total FP COMP 117 > 89
Total FN 222 < 288
P-value 5.19332990918e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

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

^top





Performance of Sfold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Sfold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 485
Total TN 74747
Total FP 288
Total FP CONTRA 46
Total FP INCONS 125
Total FP COMP 117
Total FN 222
Total Scores
MCC 0.710
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.722 ± 0.097
Sensitivity 0.686
Positive Predictive Value 0.739
Nr of predictions 27

^top



2. Individual counts for Sfold [ 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 0.94 0.89 1.00 8 1144 14 0 0 14 1
2XKV_B 0.64 0.73 0.57 8 1821 25 0 6 19 3
2XQD_Y 0.85 0.81 0.89 17 1110 3 0 2 1 4
2XXA_G 0.37 0.34 0.41 12 2016 18 1 16 1 23
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
3GX2_A 0.86 0.79 0.96 22 1426 2 1 0 1 6
3IVN_B 0.91 0.83 1.00 19 884 0 0 0 0 4
3IZ4_A 0.59 0.56 0.63 53 25452 34 14 17 3 42
3IZF_C 0.89 0.91 0.86 32 2603 8 0 5 3 3
3JYV_7 -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 1095 16 2 14 0 20
3JYX_3 0.77 0.80 0.75 12 2362 24 0 4 20 3
3JYX_4 0.68 0.83 0.56 10 4738 23 7 1 15 2
3LA5_A 0.91 0.84 1.00 21 933 0 0 0 0 4
3NPB_A 0.85 0.78 0.94 29 2247 7 0 2 5 8
3O58_2 0.87 0.90 0.85 28 2721 11 0 5 6 3
3O58_3 0.51 0.50 0.52 11 4743 18 2 8 8 11
3PDR_A 0.82 0.80 0.85 40 4793 9 2 5 2 10
3RKF_A 0.91 0.83 1.00 20 846 0 0 0 0 4
3SD1_A 0.78 0.72 0.84 21 1508 4 2 2 0 8
4A1C_2 0.21 0.25 0.19 5 4489 34 8 14 12 15
4A1C_3 0.83 0.81 0.86 30 2728 7 0 5 2 7
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 0 0 0 0 4
4ENC_A 0.57 0.33 1.00 5 491 0 0 0 0 10

^top



Performance of RSpredict(20) - scored lower 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


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