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(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric Murlet(seed) Vsfold5
MCC 0.571 > 0.556
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.568 ± 0.104 > 0.553 ± 0.214
Sensitivity 0.386 < 0.537
Positive Predictive Value 0.855 > 0.589
Total TP 141 < 196
Total TN 26371 > 26203
Total FP 29 < 171
Total FP CONTRA 4 < 34
Total FP INCONS 20 < 103
Total FP COMP 5 < 34
Total FN 224 > 169
P-value 9.47856437497e-05

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of Murlet(seed) 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 Murlet(seed) 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 Murlet(seed) and Vsfold5).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for Murlet(seed) 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 Murlet(seed) and Vsfold5).

^top





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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 141
Total TN 26371
Total FP 29
Total FP CONTRA 4
Total FP INCONS 20
Total FP COMP 5
Total FN 224
Total Scores
MCC 0.571
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.568 ± 0.104
Sensitivity 0.386
Positive Predictive Value 0.855
Nr of predictions 14

^top



2. Individual counts for Murlet(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 0 516 12 0 12 0 18
3A3A_A 0.63 0.40 1.00 12 1488 0 0 0 0 18
3GX2_A 0.70 0.50 1.00 14 1435 1 0 0 1 14
3IVN_B 0.62 0.52 0.75 12 887 4 2 2 0 11
3LA5_A 0.67 0.56 0.82 14 937 3 1 2 0 11
3NPB_A 0.59 0.35 1.00 13 2265 2 0 0 2 24
3O58_3 0.52 0.27 1.00 6 4758 1 0 0 1 16
3PDR_A 0.53 0.28 1.00 14 4826 0 0 0 0 36
3RKF_A 0.62 0.50 0.80 12 851 3 1 2 0 12
3SD1_A 0.56 0.38 0.85 11 1520 2 0 2 0 18
4A1C_2 0.59 0.35 1.00 7 4509 0 0 0 0 13
4AOB_A 0.69 0.48 1.00 14 1423 1 0 0 1 15
4ENB_A 0.63 0.40 1.00 6 466 0 0 0 0 9
4ENC_A 0.63 0.40 1.00 6 490 0 0 0 0 9

^top



Performance of Vsfold5 - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Vsfold5

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 196
Total TN 26203
Total FP 171
Total FP CONTRA 34
Total FP INCONS 103
Total FP COMP 34
Total FN 169
Total Scores
MCC 0.556
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.553 ± 0.214
Sensitivity 0.537
Positive Predictive Value 0.589
Nr of predictions 14

^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
2LC8_A -0.03 0.00 0.00 0 515 13 0 13 0 18
3A3A_A 0.95 0.90 1.00 27 1473 0 0 0 0 3
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
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.