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 MXScarna(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric MXScarna(20) Pknots
MCC 0.734 > 0.670
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.707 ± 0.121 > 0.705 ± 0.160
Sensitivity 0.691 = 0.691
Positive Predictive Value 0.787 > 0.658
Total TP 248 = 248
Total TN 26412 > 26350
Total FP 112 < 165
Total FP CONTRA 31 < 43
Total FP INCONS 36 < 86
Total FP COMP 45 > 36
Total FN 111 = 111
P-value 1.66062906821e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of MXScarna(20) and Pknots. 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 MXScarna(20) and Pknots).

  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 MXScarna(20) and Pknots).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for MXScarna(20) and Pknots. 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 MXScarna(20) and Pknots).

^top





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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 248
Total TN 26412
Total FP 112
Total FP CONTRA 31
Total FP INCONS 36
Total FP COMP 45
Total FN 111
Total Scores
MCC 0.734
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.707 ± 0.121
Sensitivity 0.691
Positive Predictive Value 0.787
Nr of predictions 14

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
3A2K_C 0.74 0.73 0.76 16 1087 6 1 4 1 6
3GX2_A 0.81 0.79 0.85 22 1423 6 2 2 2 6
3IVN_B 0.81 0.74 0.89 17 884 2 2 0 0 6
3JYV_7 0.95 0.90 1.00 18 1093 2 0 0 2 2
3LA5_A 0.87 0.80 0.95 20 933 1 1 0 0 5
3NPB_A 0.77 0.73 0.82 27 2245 9 2 4 3 10
3O58_3 0.62 0.59 0.65 13 4744 18 5 2 11 9
3PDR_A 0.85 0.82 0.89 41 4794 9 2 3 4 9
3RKF_A 0.86 0.75 1.00 18 848 0 0 0 0 6
3SD1_A 0.74 0.76 0.73 22 1503 9 6 2 1 7
4A1C_2 0.22 0.25 0.21 5 4492 36 8 11 17 15
4AOB_A 0.68 0.69 0.69 20 1408 13 2 7 4 9
4ENB_A 0.29 0.13 0.67 2 469 1 0 1 0 13
4ENC_A 0.68 0.47 1.00 7 489 0 0 0 0 8

^top



Performance of Pknots - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Pknots

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 248
Total TN 26350
Total FP 165
Total FP CONTRA 43
Total FP INCONS 86
Total FP COMP 36
Total FN 111
Total Scores
MCC 0.670
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.705 ± 0.160
Sensitivity 0.691
Positive Predictive Value 0.658
Nr of predictions 14

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
3A2K_C 0.50 0.55 0.48 12 1083 13 3 10 0 10
3GX2_A 0.55 0.57 0.55 16 1420 14 4 9 1 12
3IVN_B 0.91 0.87 0.95 20 882 1 0 1 0 3
3JYV_7 0.97 0.95 1.00 19 1092 2 0 0 2 1
3LA5_A 0.94 0.88 1.00 22 932 0 0 0 0 3
3NPB_A 0.84 0.81 0.88 30 2244 9 0 4 5 7
3O58_3 0.32 0.45 0.24 10 4722 39 18 14 7 12
3PDR_A 0.64 0.64 0.65 32 4791 19 4 13 2 18
3RKF_A 0.91 0.88 0.95 21 844 1 0 1 0 3
3SD1_A 0.78 0.76 0.81 22 1506 5 1 4 0 7
4A1C_2 0.33 0.40 0.29 8 4488 36 9 11 16 12
4AOB_A 0.19 0.21 0.21 6 1409 23 3 19 1 23
4ENB_A 1.00 1.00 1.00 15 457 2 0 0 2 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.