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(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

  4. Performance of Carnac(seed) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric MXScarna(seed) Carnac(seed)
MCC 0.709 > 0.104
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.650 ± 0.141 > 0.033 ± 0.072
Sensitivity 0.652 > 0.011
Positive Predictive Value 0.778 < 1.000
Total TP 238 > 4
Total TN 26230 < 26532
Total FP 111 > 0
Total FP CONTRA 27 > 0
Total FP INCONS 41 > 0
Total FP COMP 43 > 0
Total FN 127 < 361
P-value 2.1413769576e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of MXScarna(seed) and Carnac(seed). 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(seed) and Carnac(seed)).

  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(seed) and Carnac(seed)).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for MXScarna(seed) and Carnac(seed). 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(seed) and Carnac(seed)).

^top





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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 238
Total TN 26230
Total FP 111
Total FP CONTRA 27
Total FP INCONS 41
Total FP COMP 43
Total FN 127
Total Scores
MCC 0.709
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.650 ± 0.141
Sensitivity 0.652
Positive Predictive Value 0.778
Nr of predictions 14

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A -0.03 0.00 0.00 0 518 12 0 10 2 18
3A3A_A 0.84 0.77 0.92 23 1475 4 0 2 2 7
3GX2_A 0.83 0.82 0.85 23 1422 7 2 2 3 5
3IVN_B 0.69 0.57 0.87 13 888 2 2 0 0 10
3LA5_A 0.82 0.72 0.95 18 935 1 1 0 0 7
3NPB_A 0.76 0.70 0.84 26 2247 10 2 3 5 11
3O58_3 0.54 0.50 0.58 11 4745 20 5 3 12 11
3PDR_A 0.87 0.88 0.86 44 4789 10 4 3 3 6
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 4 4 1 7
4A1C_2 0.45 0.40 0.50 8 4500 20 4 4 12 12
4AOB_A 0.71 0.69 0.74 20 1410 10 2 5 3 9
4ENB_A 0.54 0.40 0.75 6 464 2 0 2 0 9
4ENC_A 0.48 0.40 0.60 6 486 4 1 3 0 9

^top



Performance of Carnac(seed) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Carnac(seed)

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 4
Total TN 26532
Total FP 0
Total FP CONTRA 0
Total FP INCONS 0
Total FP COMP 0
Total FN 361
Total Scores
MCC 0.104
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.033 ± 0.072
Sensitivity 0.011
Positive Predictive Value 1.000
Nr of predictions 14

^top



2. Individual counts for Carnac(seed) [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.47 0.22 1.00 4 524 0 0 0 0 14
3A3A_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1500 0 0 0 0 30
3GX2_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1449 0 0 0 0 28
3IVN_B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 903 0 0 0 0 23
3LA5_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 954 0 0 0 0 25
3NPB_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2278 0 0 0 0 37
3O58_3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 4764 0 0 0 0 22
3PDR_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 4840 0 0 0 0 50
3RKF_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 866 0 0 0 0 24
3SD1_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1533 0 0 0 0 29
4A1C_2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 4516 0 0 0 0 20
4AOB_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1437 0 0 0 0 29
4ENB_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 472 0 0 0 0 15
4ENC_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 496 0 0 0 0 15

^top


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