CompaRNA - on-line benchmarks of RNA structure prediction methods

FAQ

Metric	CentroidAlifold(20)		Fold
MCC	0.691	>	0.581
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals	0.690 ± 0.084	>	0.567 ± 0.118
Sensitivity	0.525	>	0.512
Positive Predictive Value	0.912	>	0.662
Total TP	354	>	345
Total TN	154828	>	154695
Total FP	46	<	213
Total FP CONTRA	7	<	24
Total FP INCONS	27	<	152
Total FP COMP	12	<	37
Total FN	320	<	329
P-value	1.5677163434e-08

Comparison of performance of CentroidAlifold(20) and Fold. 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 CentroidAlifold(20) and Fold).
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 CentroidAlifold(20) and Fold).
Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for CentroidAlifold(20) and Fold. 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 CentroidAlifold(20) and Fold).

Total Scores
MCC	0.691
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals	0.690 ± 0.084
Sensitivity	0.525
Positive Predictive Value	0.912
Nr of predictions	15

RNA Chain	Rfam family	MCC	SENS	PPV	TP	TN	FP	FP CONTRA	FP INCONS	FP COMP	FN
2XQD_Y	tRNA links to Rfam database...	0.88	0.78	1.00	21	2829	0	0	0	0	6
3AMU_B	tRNA links to Rfam database...	0.86	0.74	1.00	20	2983	1	0	0	1	7
3IZ4_A	tmRNA links to Rfam database...	0.58	0.39	0.88	51	70818	7	3	4	0	81
3IZF_C	5S_rRNA links to Rfam database...	0.75	0.61	0.92	33	6867	4	0	3	1	21
3NPB_A	SAM links to Rfam database...	0.70	0.54	0.89	25	6993	5	1	2	2	21
3O58_3	5_8S_rRNA links to Rfam database...	0.54	0.31	0.92	11	12391	1	0	1	0	24
3O58_2	5S_rRNA links to Rfam database...	0.78	0.76	0.81	29	7224	9	2	5	2	9
3PDR_A	ykoK links to Rfam database...	0.76	0.63	0.94	45	12832	5	0	3	2	27
3RKF_A	Purine links to Rfam database...	0.72	0.53	1.00	18	2193	0	0	0	0	16
3SD1_A	THF links to Rfam database...	0.71	0.52	0.96	22	3893	1	0	1	0	20
4A1C_2	5_8S_rRNA links to Rfam database...	0.26	0.15	0.45	5	11770	8	1	5	2	28
4A1C_3	5S_rRNA links to Rfam database...	0.76	0.63	0.92	34	7103	4	0	3	1	20
4AOB_A	SAM links to Rfam database...	0.75	0.57	1.00	24	4347	1	0	0	1	18
4ENB_A	crcB links to Rfam database...	0.69	0.47	1.00	9	1266	0	0	0	0	10
4ENC_A	crcB links to Rfam database...	0.60	0.37	1.00	7	1319	0	0	0	0	12

Total Scores
MCC	0.581
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals	0.567 ± 0.118
Sensitivity	0.512
Positive Predictive Value	0.662
Nr of predictions	15

RNA Chain	Rfam family	MCC	SENS	PPV	TP	TN	FP	FP CONTRA	FP INCONS	FP COMP	FN
2XQD_Y	tRNA links to Rfam database...	0.88	0.78	1.00	21	2829	0	0	0	0	6
3AMU_B	tRNA links to Rfam database...	0.64	0.59	0.70	16	2980	9	0	7	2	11
3IZ4_A	tmRNA links to Rfam database...	0.53	0.46	0.61	61	70776	44	5	34	5	71
3IZF_C	5S_rRNA links to Rfam database...	0.70	0.59	0.82	32	6864	7	1	6	0	22
3NPB_A	SAM links to Rfam database...	0.70	0.61	0.80	28	6986	10	1	6	3	18
3O58_3	5_8S_rRNA links to Rfam database...	0.29	0.31	0.28	11	12363	41	3	26	12	24
3O58_2	5S_rRNA links to Rfam database...	0.71	0.71	0.71	27	7222	12	3	8	1	11
3PDR_A	ykoK links to Rfam database...	0.77	0.64	0.94	46	12831	5	0	3	2	26
3RKF_A	Purine links to Rfam database...	0.76	0.59	1.00	20	2191	0	0	0	0	14
3SD1_A	THF links to Rfam database...	0.57	0.48	0.69	20	3887	9	1	8	0	22
4A1C_2	5_8S_rRNA links to Rfam database...	0.14	0.15	0.14	5	11744	43	5	27	11	28
4A1C_3	5S_rRNA links to Rfam database...	0.68	0.57	0.82	31	7102	7	1	6	0	23
4AOB_A	SAM links to Rfam database...	0.50	0.40	0.63	17	4344	11	2	8	1	25
4ENB_A	crcB links to Rfam database...	0.32	0.26	0.42	5	1263	7	1	6	0	14
4ENC_A	crcB links to Rfam database...	0.31	0.26	0.38	5	1313	8	1	7	0	14

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