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 RNAsubopt - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric RNAsubopt MCFold
MCC 0.597 > 0.527
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.564 ± 0.144 > 0.498 ± 0.118
Sensitivity 0.604 > 0.563
Positive Predictive Value 0.602 > 0.508
Total TP 281 > 262
Total TN 29961 > 29912
Total FP 220 < 299
Total FP CONTRA 50 < 68
Total FP INCONS 136 < 186
Total FP COMP 34 < 45
Total FN 184 < 203
P-value 5.23657817852e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of RNAsubopt and MCFold. 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 RNAsubopt and MCFold).

  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 RNAsubopt and MCFold).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for RNAsubopt and MCFold. 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 RNAsubopt and MCFold).

^top





Performance of RNAsubopt - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNAsubopt

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 281
Total TN 29961
Total FP 220
Total FP CONTRA 50
Total FP INCONS 136
Total FP COMP 34
Total FN 184
Total Scores
MCC 0.597
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.564 ± 0.144
Sensitivity 0.604
Positive Predictive Value 0.602
Nr of predictions 22

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KFC_A - -0.03 0.00 0.00 0 229 7 1 6 0 8
2LC8_A -0.03 0.00 0.00 0 513 15 3 12 0 18
2RP0_A - 0.84 0.71 1.00 5 111 0 0 0 0 2
2ZZN_D 0.52 0.55 0.52 12 961 11 3 8 0 10
3A2K_C 0.47 0.50 0.46 11 1084 13 3 10 0 11
3A3A_A 0.97 0.93 1.00 28 1472 0 0 0 0 2
3GCA_A - 0.84 0.71 1.00 5 153 0 0 0 0 2
3GX2_A 0.53 0.54 0.54 15 1421 14 4 9 1 13
3IVN_B 0.88 0.78 1.00 18 885 0 0 0 0 5
3IWN_A 0.69 0.68 0.70 19 1445 9 1 7 1 9
3J0L_a - 0.35 0.36 0.36 4 400 8 3 4 1 7
3JYV_7 -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 1090 21 4 17 0 20
3LA5_A 0.91 0.84 1.00 21 933 0 0 0 0 4
3NKB_B - 0.66 0.68 0.65 13 715 7 0 7 0 6
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 0.73 0.72 0.75 21 1505 7 4 3 0 8
3U4M_B - 0.49 0.55 0.46 12 1250 14 3 11 0 10
4A1C_2 0.18 0.25 0.14 5 4481 43 13 17 13 15
4ENB_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 461 2 0 0 2 4
4ENC_A 0.36 0.33 0.42 5 484 7 0 7 0 10

^top



Performance of MCFold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for MCFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 262
Total TN 29912
Total FP 299
Total FP CONTRA 68
Total FP INCONS 186
Total FP COMP 45
Total FN 203
Total Scores
MCC 0.527
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.498 ± 0.118
Sensitivity 0.563
Positive Predictive Value 0.508
Nr of predictions 22

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KFC_A - 0.54 0.63 0.50 5 226 5 2 3 0 3
2LC8_A 0.44 0.44 0.47 8 511 10 0 9 1 10
2RP0_A - 0.70 0.71 0.71 5 109 2 1 1 0 2
2ZZN_D 0.69 0.73 0.67 16 960 11 1 7 3 6
3A2K_C 0.49 0.55 0.46 12 1082 14 3 11 0 10
3A3A_A 0.98 0.97 1.00 29 1471 0 0 0 0 1
3GCA_A - -0.05 0.00 0.00 0 150 8 4 4 0 7
3GX2_A 0.58 0.61 0.57 17 1419 15 1 12 2 11
3IVN_B 0.45 0.48 0.46 11 879 14 5 8 1 12
3IWN_A 0.19 0.21 0.20 6 1442 24 5 19 0 22
3J0L_a - 0.14 0.18 0.15 2 398 13 1 10 2 9
3JYV_7 0.25 0.30 0.24 6 1086 20 8 11 1 14
3LA5_A 0.44 0.44 0.48 11 931 12 2 10 0 14
3NKB_B - 0.68 0.74 0.64 14 713 8 2 6 0 5
3O58_3 0.28 0.36 0.22 8 4727 39 14 15 10 14
3PDR_A 0.78 0.80 0.77 40 4788 14 5 7 2 10
3RKF_A 0.89 0.88 0.91 21 843 3 0 2 1 3
3SD1_A 0.43 0.45 0.43 13 1503 17 1 16 0 16
3U4M_B - 0.74 0.77 0.71 17 1252 10 1 6 3 5
4A1C_2 0.18 0.25 0.14 5 4480 45 12 19 14 15
4ENB_A 0.78 0.73 0.85 11 459 4 0 2 2 4
4ENC_A 0.34 0.33 0.38 5 483 11 0 8 3 10

^top


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