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 Carnac(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric Carnac(20) Pknots
MCC 0.619 > 0.540
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.582 ± 0.094 < 0.592 ± 0.111
Sensitivity 0.423 < 0.487
Positive Predictive Value 0.911 > 0.605
Total TP 360 < 415
Total TN 128134 > 127843
Total FP 56 < 307
Total FP CONTRA 8 < 50
Total FP INCONS 27 < 221
Total FP COMP 21 < 36
Total FN 492 > 437
P-value 5.19332990918e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of Carnac(20) and Pknots. 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 Carnac(20) and Pknots).

  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 Carnac(20) and Pknots).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for Carnac(20) and Pknots. 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 Carnac(20) and Pknots).

^top





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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 360
Total TN 128134
Total FP 56
Total FP CONTRA 8
Total FP INCONS 27
Total FP COMP 21
Total FN 492
Total Scores
MCC 0.619
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.582 ± 0.094
Sensitivity 0.423
Positive Predictive Value 0.911
Nr of predictions 24

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KDQ_B 0.73 0.55 1.00 6 400 0 0 0 0 5
2WRQ_Y 0.57 0.59 0.56 10 2832 13 5 3 5 7
2XQD_Y 0.79 0.63 1.00 17 2833 0 0 0 0 10
3A2K_C 0.78 0.61 1.00 17 2909 0 0 0 0 11
3AMU_B 0.69 0.59 0.80 16 2983 6 0 4 2 11
3G4S_9 0.50 0.28 0.89 16 7363 2 1 1 0 41
3GX2_A 0.57 0.33 1.00 13 4358 0 0 0 0 27
3IVN_B 0.78 0.61 1.00 19 2327 0 0 0 0 12
3IZF_C 0.73 0.56 0.97 30 6872 1 0 1 0 24
3JYV_7 0.68 0.50 0.94 16 2833 1 0 1 0 16
3JYX_3 0.64 0.56 0.75 15 6308 10 1 4 5 12
3JYX_4 0.46 0.21 1.00 7 12239 2 0 0 2 26
3LA5_A 0.78 0.62 1.00 21 2464 0 0 0 0 13
3NPB_A 0.44 0.20 1.00 9 7012 2 0 0 2 37
3O58_2 0.83 0.71 0.96 27 7232 2 0 1 1 11
3O58_3 0.51 0.26 1.00 9 12394 0 0 0 0 26
3PDR_A 0.62 0.40 0.97 29 12850 3 0 1 2 43
3RKF_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2191 0 0 0 0 14
3SD1_A 0.60 0.38 0.94 16 3899 1 0 1 0 26
4A1C_3 0.67 0.52 0.88 28 7108 4 0 4 0 26
4A1C_2 0.33 0.15 0.71 5 11774 3 0 2 1 28
4AOB_A 0.49 0.33 0.74 14 4352 6 1 4 1 28
4ENB_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1275 0 0 0 0 19
4ENC_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1326 0 0 0 0 19

^top



Performance of Pknots - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Pknots

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 415
Total TN 127843
Total FP 307
Total FP CONTRA 50
Total FP INCONS 221
Total FP COMP 36
Total FN 437
Total Scores
MCC 0.540
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.592 ± 0.111
Sensitivity 0.487
Positive Predictive Value 0.605
Nr of predictions 24

^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
2KDQ_B 0.95 0.91 1.00 10 396 0 0 0 0 1
2WRQ_Y 0.57 0.59 0.56 10 2832 12 5 3 4 7
2XQD_Y 0.88 0.78 1.00 21 2829 0 0 0 0 6
3A2K_C 0.45 0.43 0.48 12 2901 13 2 11 0 16
3AMU_B 0.86 0.74 1.00 20 2983 2 0 0 2 7
3G4S_9 0.25 0.21 0.31 12 7342 27 0 27 0 45
3GX2_A 0.47 0.40 0.55 16 4342 14 1 12 1 24
3IVN_B 0.78 0.65 0.95 20 2325 1 0 1 0 11
3IZF_C 0.70 0.61 0.80 33 6862 8 1 7 0 21
3JYV_7 0.81 0.66 1.00 21 2829 0 0 0 0 11
3JYX_3 0.34 0.37 0.31 10 6296 24 9 13 2 17
3JYX_4 0.18 0.21 0.16 7 12203 41 13 23 5 26
3LA5_A 0.80 0.65 1.00 22 2463 0 0 0 0 12
3NPB_A 0.76 0.67 0.86 31 6985 8 1 4 3 15
3O58_2 0.83 0.74 0.93 28 7230 3 0 2 1 10
3O58_3 0.27 0.31 0.24 11 12357 38 11 24 3 24
3PDR_A 0.54 0.44 0.65 32 12831 19 0 17 2 40
3RKF_A 0.77 0.62 0.95 21 2189 1 0 1 0 13
3SD1_A 0.65 0.52 0.81 22 3889 5 0 5 0 20
4A1C_3 0.25 0.22 0.29 12 7099 29 1 28 0 42
4A1C_2 0.24 0.24 0.25 8 11749 36 3 21 12 25
4AOB_A 0.17 0.14 0.21 6 4343 23 1 21 1 36
4ENB_A 0.83 0.79 0.88 15 1258 2 1 1 0 4
4ENC_A 0.86 0.79 0.94 15 1310 1 1 0 0 4

^top


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