CompaRNA - on-line benchmarks of RNA structure prediction methods

FAQ

Metric	RNAalifold(seed)		MaxExpect
MCC	0.623	>	0.601
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals	0.623 ± 0.128	>	0.618 ± 0.174
Sensitivity	0.470	<	0.626
Positive Predictive Value	0.831	>	0.582
Total TP	226	<	301
Total TN	72740	>	72495
Total FP	62	<	274
Total FP CONTRA	25	<	85
Total FP INCONS	21	<	131
Total FP COMP	16	<	58
Total FN	255	>	180
P-value	1.82294361511e-07

Comparison of performance of RNAalifold(seed) and MaxExpect. 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 RNAalifold(seed) and MaxExpect).
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 RNAalifold(seed) and MaxExpect).
Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for RNAalifold(seed) and MaxExpect. 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 RNAalifold(seed) and MaxExpect).

Total Scores
MCC	0.623
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals	0.623 ± 0.128
Sensitivity	0.470
Positive Predictive Value	0.831
Nr of predictions	15

RNA Chain	Rfam family	MCC	SENS	PPV	TP	TN	FP	FP CONTRA	FP INCONS	FP COMP	FN
2LC8_A	GP_knot1 links to Rfam database...	-0.03	0.00	0.00	0	516	12	0	12	0	18
3GX2_A	SAM links to Rfam database...	0.88	0.79	1.00	22	1427	1	0	0	1	6
3IVN_B	Purine links to Rfam database...	0.71	0.65	0.79	15	884	4	2	2	0	8
3IYQ_A	tmRNA links to Rfam database...	0.36	0.27	0.48	14	22411	19	13	2	4	37
3IZ4_A	tmRNA links to Rfam database...	0.46	0.26	0.81	25	25505	8	6	0	2	70
3LA5_A	Purine links to Rfam database...	0.73	0.64	0.84	16	935	3	1	2	0	9
3NPB_A	SAM links to Rfam database...	0.77	0.59	1.00	22	2256	3	0	0	3	15
3O58_3	5_8S_rRNA links to Rfam database...	0.60	0.36	1.00	8	4756	1	0	0	1	14
3PDR_A	ykoK links to Rfam database...	0.81	0.66	1.00	33	4807	1	0	0	1	17
3RKF_A	Purine links to Rfam database...	0.74	0.67	0.84	16	847	3	1	2	0	8
3SD1_A	THF links to Rfam database...	0.70	0.59	0.85	17	1513	3	2	1	0	12
4A1C_2	5_8S_rRNA links to Rfam database...	0.50	0.25	1.00	5	4511	2	0	0	2	15
4AOB_A	SAM links to Rfam database...	0.85	0.72	1.00	21	1416	2	0	0	2	8
4ENB_A	crcB links to Rfam database...	0.63	0.40	1.00	6	466	0	0	0	0	9
4ENC_A	crcB links to Rfam database...	0.63	0.40	1.00	6	490	0	0	0	0	9

Total Scores
MCC	0.601
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals	0.618 ± 0.174
Sensitivity	0.626
Positive Predictive Value	0.582
Nr of predictions	15

RNA Chain	Rfam family	MCC	SENS	PPV	TP	TN	FP	FP CONTRA	FP INCONS	FP COMP	FN
2LC8_A	GP_knot1 links to Rfam database...	-0.03	0.00	0.00	0	513	15	3	12	0	18
3GX2_A	SAM links to Rfam database...	0.93	0.89	0.96	25	1423	2	1	0	1	3
3IVN_B	Purine links to Rfam database...	0.91	0.83	1.00	19	884	0	0	0	0	4
3IYQ_A	tmRNA links to Rfam database...	0.24	0.33	0.17	17	22342	96	41	40	15	34
3IZ4_A	tmRNA links to Rfam database...	0.61	0.61	0.62	58	25442	42	14	22	6	37
3LA5_A	Purine links to Rfam database...	0.91	0.84	1.00	21	933	0	0	0	0	4
3NPB_A	SAM links to Rfam database...	0.77	0.73	0.82	27	2245	10	0	6	4	10
3O58_3	5_8S_rRNA links to Rfam database...	0.40	0.50	0.33	11	4731	36	8	14	14	11
3PDR_A	ykoK links to Rfam database...	0.92	0.90	0.94	45	4792	5	1	2	2	5
3RKF_A	Purine links to Rfam database...	0.91	0.83	1.00	20	846	0	0	0	0	4
3SD1_A	THF links to Rfam database...	0.70	0.69	0.71	20	1505	8	3	5	0	9
4A1C_2	5_8S_rRNA links to Rfam database...	0.19	0.25	0.16	5	4484	41	10	17	14	15
4AOB_A	SAM links to Rfam database...	0.60	0.59	0.63	17	1410	11	4	6	1	12
4ENB_A	crcB links to Rfam database...	0.85	0.73	1.00	11	461	0	0	0	0	4
4ENC_A	crcB links to Rfam database...	0.36	0.33	0.42	5	484	8	0	7	1	10

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