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 Mastr(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

  4. Performance of Vsfold5 - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

  5. Compile and download dataset for Mastr(20) & Vsfold5 [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric Mastr(20) Vsfold5
MCC 0.506 > 0.495
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.489 ± 0.199 < 0.538 ± 0.201
Sensitivity 0.337 < 0.480
Positive Predictive Value 0.769 > 0.519
Total TP 153 < 218
Total TN 52064 > 51843
Total FP 52 < 242
Total FP CONTRA 10 < 52
Total FP INCONS 36 < 150
Total FP COMP 6 < 40
Total FN 301 > 236
P-value 0.155505742079

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of Mastr(20) and Vsfold5. 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 Mastr(20) and Vsfold5).

  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 Mastr(20) and Vsfold5).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for Mastr(20) and Vsfold5. 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 Mastr(20) and Vsfold5).

^top





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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 153
Total TN 52064
Total FP 52
Total FP CONTRA 10
Total FP INCONS 36
Total FP COMP 6
Total FN 301
Total Scores
MCC 0.506
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.489 ± 0.199
Sensitivity 0.337
Positive Predictive Value 0.769
Nr of predictions 15

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
3A2K_C 0.81 0.77 0.85 17 1088 3 0 3 0 5
3GX2_A 0.46 0.39 0.55 11 1429 10 2 7 1 17
3IVN_B 0.86 0.83 0.90 19 882 2 2 0 0 4
3IZ4_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 25536 0 0 0 0 95
3JYV_7 0.97 0.95 1.00 19 1092 2 0 0 2 1
3LA5_A 0.89 0.80 1.00 20 934 0 0 0 0 5
3NPB_A 0.34 0.30 0.41 11 2251 18 1 15 2 26
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 0.84 0.71 1.00 17 849 0 0 0 0 7
3SD1_A 0.73 0.72 0.75 21 1505 7 4 3 0 8
4A1C_2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 4516 0 0 0 0 20
4AOB_A 0.42 0.34 0.53 10 1418 10 1 8 1 19
4ENB_A 0.44 0.20 1.00 3 469 0 0 0 0 12
4ENC_A 0.57 0.33 1.00 5 491 0 0 0 0 10

^top



Performance of Vsfold5 - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Vsfold5

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 218
Total TN 51843
Total FP 242
Total FP CONTRA 52
Total FP INCONS 150
Total FP COMP 40
Total FN 236
Total Scores
MCC 0.495
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.538 ± 0.201
Sensitivity 0.480
Positive Predictive Value 0.519
Nr of predictions 15

^top



2. Individual counts for Vsfold5 [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
3A2K_C 0.95 0.91 1.00 20 1088 0 0 0 0 2
3GX2_A 0.61 0.57 0.67 16 1425 9 0 8 1 12
3IVN_B 0.88 0.78 1.00 18 885 0 0 0 0 5
3IZ4_A 0.31 0.31 0.33 29 25448 65 14 45 6 66
3JYV_7 -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 1092 19 4 15 0 20
3LA5_A -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 938 16 0 16 0 25
3NPB_A 0.62 0.54 0.71 20 2250 10 1 7 2 17
3O58_3 0.51 0.59 0.45 13 4735 28 11 5 12 9
3PDR_A 0.69 0.64 0.74 32 4797 13 3 8 2 18
3RKF_A 0.90 0.92 0.88 22 841 3 3 0 0 2
3SD1_A 0.13 0.14 0.15 4 1507 22 5 17 0 25
4A1C_2 0.33 0.40 0.28 8 4487 37 8 13 16 12
4AOB_A 0.21 0.21 0.25 6 1413 19 2 16 1 23
4ENB_A 1.00 1.00 1.00 15 457 0 0 0 0 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.