CompaRNA - on-line benchmarks of RNA structure prediction methods

CompaRNA - on-line benchmarks of RNA structure prediction methods

Laboratory of Structural Bioinformatics @ Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznan

Home

RNA 2D Atlas

Help

FAQ

Table of contents:

Overview

Performance Plots

Performance of CentroidHomfold‑LAST - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

Total counts & total scores
Individual counts

Performance of NanoFolder - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

Total counts & total scores
Individual counts

Compile and download dataset for CentroidHomfold‑LAST & NanoFolder [.zip] - may take several seconds...

Overview

Metric	CentroidHomfold‑LAST		NanoFolder
MCC	0.613	>	0.473
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals	0.672 ± 0.176	>	0.626 ± 0.165
Sensitivity	0.482	>	0.479
Positive Predictive Value	0.787	>	0.476
Total TP	188	>	187
Total TN	44270	>	44116
Total FP	59	<	218
Total FP CONTRA	6	<	31
Total FP INCONS	45	<	175
Total FP COMP	8	<	12
Total FN	202	<	203
P-value	1.95070920198e-08

Performance plots

Performance of CentroidHomfold‑LAST - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for CentroidHomfold‑LAST

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP	188
Total TN	44270
Total FP	59
Total FP CONTRA	6
Total FP INCONS	45
Total FP COMP	8
Total FN	202

Total Scores
MCC	0.613
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals	0.672 ± 0.176
Sensitivity	0.482
Positive Predictive Value	0.787
Nr of predictions	16

2. Individual counts for CentroidHomfold‑LAST [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain	Rfam family	MCC	SENS	PPV	TP	TN	FP	FP CONTRA	FP INCONS	FP COMP	FN
2LC8_A	GP_knot1 links to Rfam database...	-0.01	0.00	0.00	0	1529	11	0	11	0	20
2LDL_A	-	0.90	0.82	1.00	9	342	1	0	0	1	2
2LK3_A	-	0.95	0.90	1.00	9	267	0	0	0	0	1
2LKR_A	-	0.00	0.00	0.00	0	6101	4	0	4	0	39
2LQZ_A	-	0.85	0.82	0.90	9	341	1	1	0	0	2
2LWK_A	-	0.83	0.77	0.91	10	485	1	0	1	0	3
3J16_L	tRNA links to Rfam database...	0.75	0.57	1.00	17	2758	0	0	0	0	13
3SN2_B	IRE_II links to Rfam database...	0.91	0.83	1.00	10	396	0	0	0	0	2
3U4M_B	-	0.58	0.43	0.80	16	3140	4	0	4	0	21
3UZL_B	tRNA links to Rfam database...	0.72	0.54	0.95	20	3549	1	0	1	0	17
3VJR_D	-	0.96	0.92	1.00	12	618	0	0	0	0	1
4A1C_3	5S_rRNA links to Rfam database...	0.68	0.56	0.83	30	7104	6	0	6	0	24
4A1C_2	5_8S_rRNA links to Rfam database...	0.16	0.15	0.18	5	11753	29	5	18	6	28
4A4U_A	-	1.00	1.00	1.00	9	222	0	0	0	0	0
4AOB_A	SAM links to Rfam database...	0.71	0.50	1.00	21	4350	1	0	0	1	21
4ENC_A	crcB links to Rfam database...	0.76	0.58	1.00	11	1315	0	0	0	0	8

Performance of NanoFolder - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for NanoFolder

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP	187
Total TN	44116
Total FP	218
Total FP CONTRA	31
Total FP INCONS	175
Total FP COMP	12
Total FN	203

Total Scores
MCC	0.473
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals	0.626 ± 0.165
Sensitivity	0.479
Positive Predictive Value	0.476
Nr of predictions	16

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

RNA Chain	Rfam family	MCC	SENS	PPV	TP	TN	FP	FP CONTRA	FP INCONS	FP COMP	FN
2LC8_A	GP_knot1 links to Rfam database...	0.52	0.55	0.50	11	1518	11	0	11	0	9
2LDL_A	-	0.90	0.82	1.00	9	342	1	0	0	1	2
2LK3_A	-	0.95	0.90	1.00	9	267	0	0	0	0	1
2LKR_A	-	0.29	0.33	0.25	13	6054	38	8	30	0	26
2LQZ_A	-	0.91	0.91	0.91	10	340	1	1	0	0	1
2LWK_A	-	0.83	0.77	0.91	10	485	2	0	1	1	3
3J16_L	tRNA links to Rfam database...	0.36	0.37	0.37	11	2745	19	3	16	0	19
3SN2_B	IRE_II links to Rfam database...	0.96	0.92	1.00	11	395	0	0	0	0	1
3U4M_B	-	0.61	0.57	0.66	21	3128	11	1	10	0	16
3UZL_B	tRNA links to Rfam database...	0.36	0.35	0.38	13	3536	21	3	18	0	24
3VJR_D	-	0.96	0.92	1.00	12	618	0	0	0	0	1
4A1C_3	5S_rRNA links to Rfam database...	0.48	0.46	0.51	25	7091	24	2	22	0	29
4A1C_2	5_8S_rRNA links to Rfam database...	0.00	0.00	0.00	0	11728	61	12	41	8	33
4A4U_A	-	1.00	1.00	1.00	9	222	0	0	0	0	0
4AOB_A	SAM links to Rfam database...	0.33	0.29	0.39	12	4340	20	1	18	1	30
4ENC_A	crcB links to Rfam database...	0.57	0.58	0.58	11	1307	9	0	8	1	8

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