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 Pknots - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric Pknots Murlet(seed)
MCC 0.695 > 0.571
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.728 ± 0.157 > 0.568 ± 0.104
Sensitivity 0.712 > 0.386
Positive Predictive Value 0.686 < 0.855
Total TP 260 > 141
Total TN 26157 < 26371
Total FP 153 > 29
Total FP CONTRA 42 > 4
Total FP INCONS 77 > 20
Total FP COMP 34 > 5
Total FN 105 < 224
P-value 2.57237423209e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

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

^top





Performance of Pknots - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Pknots

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 260
Total TN 26157
Total FP 153
Total FP CONTRA 42
Total FP INCONS 77
Total FP COMP 34
Total FN 105
Total Scores
MCC 0.695
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.728 ± 0.157
Sensitivity 0.712
Positive Predictive Value 0.686
Nr of predictions 14

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.83 0.83 0.83 15 510 3 2 1 0 3
3A3A_A 0.97 0.93 1.00 28 1472 0 0 0 0 2
3GX2_A 0.55 0.57 0.55 16 1420 14 4 9 1 12
3IVN_B 0.91 0.87 0.95 20 882 1 0 1 0 3
3LA5_A 0.94 0.88 1.00 22 932 0 0 0 0 3
3NPB_A 0.84 0.81 0.88 30 2244 9 0 4 5 7
3O58_3 0.32 0.45 0.24 10 4722 39 18 14 7 12
3PDR_A 0.64 0.64 0.65 32 4791 19 4 13 2 18
3RKF_A 0.91 0.88 0.95 21 844 1 0 1 0 3
3SD1_A 0.78 0.76 0.81 22 1506 5 1 4 0 7
4A1C_2 0.33 0.40 0.29 8 4488 36 9 11 16 12
4AOB_A 0.19 0.21 0.21 6 1409 23 3 19 1 23
4ENB_A 1.00 1.00 1.00 15 457 2 0 0 2 0
4ENC_A 0.97 1.00 0.94 15 480 1 1 0 0 0

^top



Performance of Murlet(seed) - scored lower 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


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