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 MaxExpect - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

  5. Compile and download dataset for MaxExpect & RNAfold [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric MaxExpect RNAfold
MCC 0.648 > 0.540
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.630 ± 0.113 > 0.593 ± 0.117
Sensitivity 0.660 > 0.567
Positive Predictive Value 0.637 > 0.516
Total TP 953 > 819
Total TN 1567351 > 1567260
Total FP 673 < 883
Total FP CONTRA 180 < 207
Total FP INCONS 364 < 562
Total FP COMP 129 > 114
Total FN 492 < 626
P-value 5.23657817852e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of MaxExpect and RNAfold. 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 MaxExpect and RNAfold).

  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 MaxExpect and RNAfold).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for MaxExpect and RNAfold. 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 MaxExpect and RNAfold).

^top





Performance of MaxExpect - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for MaxExpect

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 953
Total TN 1567351
Total FP 673
Total FP CONTRA 180
Total FP INCONS 364
Total FP COMP 129
Total FN 492
Total Scores
MCC 0.648
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.630 ± 0.113
Sensitivity 0.660
Positive Predictive Value 0.637
Nr of predictions 24

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KRL_A - 0.91 0.87 0.95 20 2003 9 1 0 8 3
2LC8_A -0.03 0.00 0.00 0 513 15 3 12 0 18
3A2K_C 0.47 0.50 0.46 11 1084 13 3 10 0 11
3ADB_C - 0.86 0.85 0.88 28 1787 4 0 4 0 5
3GX2_A 0.93 0.89 0.96 25 1423 2 1 0 1 3
3IVN_B 0.91 0.83 1.00 19 884 0 0 0 0 4
3IWN_A 0.80 0.79 0.81 22 1445 6 1 4 1 6
3IYQ_A 0.24 0.33 0.17 17 22342 96 41 40 15 34
3IZ4_A 0.61 0.61 0.62 58 25442 42 14 22 6 37
3J0L_a - 0.39 0.36 0.44 4 402 6 4 1 1 7
3JYV_7 0.48 0.45 0.53 9 1094 9 3 5 1 11
3KIY_A - 0.67 0.68 0.66 531 1485073 336 81 195 60 255
3LA5_A 0.91 0.84 1.00 21 933 0 0 0 0 4
3NKB_B - 0.69 0.74 0.67 14 714 7 0 7 0 5
3NPB_A 0.77 0.73 0.82 27 2245 10 0 6 4 10
3O58_3 0.40 0.50 0.33 11 4731 36 8 14 14 11
3PDR_A 0.92 0.90 0.94 45 4792 5 1 2 2 5
3RKF_A 0.91 0.83 1.00 20 846 0 0 0 0 4
3SD1_A 0.70 0.69 0.71 20 1505 8 3 5 0 9
3U4M_B - 0.58 0.59 0.59 13 1254 9 2 7 0 9
4A1C_2 0.19 0.25 0.16 5 4484 41 10 17 14 15
4AOB_A 0.60 0.59 0.63 17 1410 11 4 6 1 12
4ENB_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 461 0 0 0 0 4
4ENC_A 0.36 0.33 0.42 5 484 8 0 7 1 10

^top



Performance of RNAfold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNAfold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 819
Total TN 1567260
Total FP 883
Total FP CONTRA 207
Total FP INCONS 562
Total FP COMP 114
Total FN 626
Total Scores
MCC 0.540
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.593 ± 0.117
Sensitivity 0.567
Positive Predictive Value 0.516
Nr of predictions 24

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KRL_A - 0.91 0.87 0.95 20 2003 9 1 0 8 3
2LC8_A 0.64 0.61 0.69 11 512 5 0 5 0 7
3A2K_C 0.47 0.50 0.46 11 1084 13 3 10 0 11
3ADB_C - 0.35 0.36 0.36 12 1786 22 1 20 1 21
3GX2_A 0.81 0.79 0.85 22 1423 5 2 2 1 6
3IVN_B 0.91 0.83 1.00 19 884 0 0 0 0 4
3IWN_A 0.69 0.68 0.70 19 1445 9 1 7 1 9
3IYQ_A 0.24 0.33 0.17 17 22340 95 45 38 12 34
3IZ4_A 0.56 0.60 0.52 57 25426 57 26 27 4 38
3J0L_a - 0.18 0.18 0.22 2 402 8 3 4 1 9
3JYV_7 -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 1089 22 4 18 0 20
3KIY_A - 0.50 0.53 0.48 414 1485013 501 90 363 48 372
3LA5_A 0.91 0.84 1.00 21 933 0 0 0 0 4
3NKB_B - 0.69 0.74 0.67 14 714 7 0 7 0 5
3NPB_A 0.91 0.86 0.97 32 2245 5 1 0 4 5
3O58_3 0.41 0.50 0.34 11 4732 35 6 15 14 11
3PDR_A 0.90 0.90 0.90 45 4790 7 2 3 2 5
3RKF_A 0.91 0.83 1.00 20 846 0 0 0 0 4
3SD1_A 0.77 0.76 0.79 22 1505 6 4 2 0 7
3U4M_B - 0.49 0.55 0.46 12 1250 14 3 11 0 10
4A1C_2 0.19 0.25 0.15 5 4482 43 11 18 14 15
4AOB_A 0.60 0.59 0.63 17 1410 11 4 6 1 12
4ENB_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 461 2 0 0 2 4
4ENC_A 0.37 0.33 0.45 5 485 7 0 6 1 10

^top


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