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 Murlet(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric Murlet(20) Sfold
MCC 0.666 > 0.665
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.679 ± 0.114 > 0.656 ± 0.154
Sensitivity 0.548 < 0.628
Positive Predictive Value 0.814 > 0.711
Total TP 249 < 285
Total TN 51957 > 51862
Total FP 79 < 148
Total FP CONTRA 17 < 38
Total FP INCONS 40 < 78
Total FP COMP 22 < 32
Total FN 205 > 169
P-value 0.402525058148

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of Murlet(20) and Sfold. 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 Murlet(20) and Sfold).

  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 Murlet(20) and Sfold).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for Murlet(20) and Sfold. 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 Murlet(20) and Sfold).

^top





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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 249
Total TN 51957
Total FP 79
Total FP CONTRA 17
Total FP INCONS 40
Total FP COMP 22
Total FN 205
Total Scores
MCC 0.666
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.679 ± 0.114
Sensitivity 0.548
Positive Predictive Value 0.814
Nr of predictions 15

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
3A2K_C 0.88 0.86 0.90 19 1087 2 0 2 0 3
3GX2_A 0.73 0.54 1.00 15 1434 1 0 0 1 13
3IVN_B 0.80 0.65 1.00 15 888 0 0 0 0 8
3IZ4_A 0.46 0.33 0.66 31 25489 22 3 13 6 64
3JYV_7 0.84 0.80 0.89 16 1093 4 0 2 2 4
3LA5_A 0.80 0.64 1.00 16 938 0 0 0 0 9
3NPB_A 0.65 0.43 1.00 16 2262 2 0 0 2 21
3O58_3 0.37 0.32 0.44 7 4748 13 4 5 4 15
3PDR_A 0.84 0.76 0.93 38 4799 3 1 2 0 12
3RKF_A 0.81 0.67 1.00 16 850 0 0 0 0 8
3SD1_A 0.82 0.83 0.83 24 1504 5 4 1 0 5
4A1C_2 0.22 0.25 0.20 5 4491 24 5 15 4 15
4AOB_A 0.87 0.76 1.00 22 1415 3 0 0 3 7
4ENB_A 0.51 0.27 1.00 4 468 0 0 0 0 11
4ENC_A 0.57 0.33 1.00 5 491 0 0 0 0 10

^top



Performance of Sfold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Sfold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 285
Total TN 51862
Total FP 148
Total FP CONTRA 38
Total FP INCONS 78
Total FP COMP 32
Total FN 169
Total Scores
MCC 0.665
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.656 ± 0.154
Sensitivity 0.628
Positive Predictive Value 0.711
Nr of predictions 15

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
3A2K_C 0.47 0.50 0.46 11 1084 13 3 10 0 11
3GX2_A 0.86 0.79 0.96 22 1426 2 1 0 1 6
3IVN_B 0.91 0.83 1.00 19 884 0 0 0 0 4
3IZ4_A 0.59 0.56 0.63 53 25452 34 14 17 3 42
3JYV_7 -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 1095 16 2 14 0 20
3LA5_A 0.91 0.84 1.00 21 933 0 0 0 0 4
3NPB_A 0.85 0.78 0.94 29 2247 7 0 2 5 8
3O58_3 0.51 0.50 0.52 11 4743 18 2 8 8 11
3PDR_A 0.82 0.80 0.85 40 4793 9 2 5 2 10
3RKF_A 0.91 0.83 1.00 20 846 0 0 0 0 4
3SD1_A 0.78 0.72 0.84 21 1508 4 2 2 0 8
4A1C_2 0.21 0.25 0.19 5 4489 34 8 14 12 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 0.57 0.33 1.00 5 491 0 0 0 0 10

^top


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