CompaRNA - on-line benchmarks of RNA structure prediction methods

FAQ

Metric	HotKnots		RSpredict(20)
MCC	0.640	>	0.624
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals	0.666 ± 0.174	>	0.613 ± 0.166
Sensitivity	0.663	>	0.559
Positive Predictive Value	0.623	<	0.702
Total TP	301	>	254
Total TN	51780	<	51901
Total FP	209	>	133
Total FP CONTRA	75	>	51
Total FP INCONS	107	>	57
Total FP COMP	27	>	25
Total FN	153	<	200
P-value	2.08749669591e-05

Comparison of performance of HotKnots 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 HotKnots and RSpredict(20)).
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 HotKnots and RSpredict(20)).
Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for HotKnots 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 HotKnots and RSpredict(20)).

Total Scores
MCC	0.640
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals	0.666 ± 0.174
Sensitivity	0.663
Positive Predictive Value	0.623
Nr of predictions	15

RNA Chain	Rfam family	MCC	SENS	PPV	TP	TN	FP	FP CONTRA	FP INCONS	FP COMP	FN
3A2K_C	tRNA links to Rfam database...	0.47	0.50	0.46	11	1084	13	3	10	0	11
3GX2_A	SAM links to Rfam database...	0.81	0.79	0.85	22	1423	5	2	2	1	6
3IVN_B	Purine links to Rfam database...	0.91	0.83	1.00	19	884	0	0	0	0	4
3IZ4_A	tmRNA links to Rfam database...	0.56	0.60	0.52	57	25426	57	26	27	4	38
3JYV_7	tRNA links to Rfam database...	-0.02	0.00	0.00	0	1089	22	4	18	0	20
3LA5_A	Purine links to Rfam database...	0.91	0.84	1.00	21	933	0	0	0	0	4
3NPB_A	SAM links to Rfam database...	0.85	0.78	0.94	29	2247	6	0	2	4	8
3O58_3	5_8S_rRNA links to Rfam database...	0.26	0.36	0.19	8	4722	35	16	18	1	14
3PDR_A	ykoK links to Rfam database...	0.81	0.80	0.82	40	4791	11	3	6	2	10
3RKF_A	Purine links to Rfam database...	0.91	0.83	1.00	20	846	0	0	0	0	4
3SD1_A	THF links to Rfam database...	0.77	0.76	0.79	22	1505	6	4	2	0	7
4A1C_2	5_8S_rRNA links to Rfam database...	0.19	0.25	0.15	5	4483	42	12	16	14	15
4AOB_A	SAM links to Rfam database...	0.60	0.59	0.63	17	1410	11	4	6	1	12
4ENB_A	crcB links to Rfam database...	1.00	1.00	1.00	15	457	0	0	0	0	0
4ENC_A	crcB links to Rfam database...	0.97	1.00	0.94	15	480	1	1	0	0	0

Total Scores
MCC	0.624
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals	0.613 ± 0.166
Sensitivity	0.559
Positive Predictive Value	0.702
Nr of predictions	15

RNA Chain	Rfam family	MCC	SENS	PPV	TP	TN	FP	FP CONTRA	FP INCONS	FP COMP	FN
3A2K_C	tRNA links to Rfam database...	0.88	0.86	0.90	19	1087	2	0	2	0	3
3GX2_A	SAM links to Rfam database...	0.40	0.21	0.75	6	1441	2	1	1	0	22
3IVN_B	Purine links to Rfam database...	0.91	0.87	0.95	20	882	1	1	0	0	3
3IZ4_A	tmRNA links to Rfam database...	0.61	0.57	0.67	54	25455	38	13	14	11	41
3JYV_7	tRNA links to Rfam database...	0.97	0.95	1.00	19	1092	2	0	0	2	1
3LA5_A	Purine links to Rfam database...	0.89	0.80	1.00	20	934	0	0	0	0	5
3NPB_A	SAM links to Rfam database...	-0.01	0.00	0.00	0	2272	6	1	5	0	37
3O58_3	5_8S_rRNA links to Rfam database...	0.38	0.50	0.30	11	4727	29	15	11	3	11
3PDR_A	ykoK links to Rfam database...	0.80	0.70	0.92	35	4802	5	1	2	2	15
3RKF_A	Purine links to Rfam database...	0.91	0.88	0.95	21	844	1	1	0	0	3
3SD1_A	THF links to Rfam database...	0.82	0.86	0.78	25	1501	7	5	2	0	4
4A1C_2	5_8S_rRNA links to Rfam database...	0.25	0.30	0.21	6	4487	30	12	11	7	14
4AOB_A	SAM links to Rfam database...	0.33	0.21	0.55	6	1426	5	1	4	0	23
4ENB_A	crcB links to Rfam database...	0.54	0.40	0.75	6	464	2	0	2	0	9
4ENC_A	crcB links to Rfam database...	0.51	0.40	0.67	6	487	3	0	3	0	9

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