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 CentroidAlifold(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

  4. Performance of RNASampler(20) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric CentroidAlifold(20) RNASampler(20)
MCC 0.695 > 0.644
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.693 ± 0.065 > 0.662 ± 0.076
Sensitivity 0.540 > 0.499
Positive Predictive Value 0.897 > 0.834
Total TP 495 > 457
Total TN 191066 < 191070
Total FP 88 < 145
Total FP CONTRA 13 < 20
Total FP INCONS 44 < 71
Total FP COMP 31 < 54
Total FN 421 < 459
P-value 4.98172311752e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of CentroidAlifold(20) and RNASampler(20). 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 RNASampler(20)).

  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 CentroidAlifold(20) and RNASampler(20)).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for CentroidAlifold(20) and RNASampler(20). 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 RNASampler(20)).

^top





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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 495
Total TN 191066
Total FP 88
Total FP CONTRA 13
Total FP INCONS 44
Total FP COMP 31
Total FN 421
Total Scores
MCC 0.695
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.693 ± 0.065
Sensitivity 0.540
Positive Predictive Value 0.897
Nr of predictions 23

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2WRQ_Y 0.57 0.59 0.56 10 2832 11 5 3 3 7
2XQD_Y 0.88 0.78 1.00 21 2829 0 0 0 0 6
3A2K_C 0.86 0.75 1.00 21 2905 0 0 0 0 7
3AMU_B 0.86 0.74 1.00 20 2983 1 0 0 1 7
3GX2_A 0.77 0.60 1.00 24 4347 1 0 0 1 16
3IVN_B 0.78 0.65 0.95 20 2325 1 1 0 0 11
3IZ4_A 0.58 0.39 0.88 51 70818 7 3 4 0 81
3IZF_C 0.75 0.61 0.92 33 6867 4 0 3 1 21
3JYV_7 0.81 0.66 1.00 21 2829 0 0 0 0 11
3JYX_4 0.39 0.27 0.56 9 12230 9 0 7 2 24
3JYX_3 0.61 0.56 0.68 15 6306 20 0 7 13 12
3LA5_A 0.78 0.62 1.00 21 2464 0 0 0 0 13
3NPB_A 0.70 0.54 0.89 25 6993 5 1 2 2 21
3O58_3 0.54 0.31 0.92 11 12391 1 0 1 0 24
3O58_2 0.78 0.76 0.81 29 7224 9 2 5 2 9
3PDR_A 0.76 0.63 0.94 45 12832 5 0 3 2 27
3RKF_A 0.72 0.53 1.00 18 2193 0 0 0 0 16
3SD1_A 0.71 0.52 0.96 22 3893 1 0 1 0 20
4A1C_3 0.76 0.63 0.92 34 7103 4 0 3 1 20
4A1C_2 0.26 0.15 0.45 5 11770 8 1 5 2 28
4AOB_A 0.75 0.57 1.00 24 4347 1 0 0 1 18
4ENB_A 0.69 0.47 1.00 9 1266 0 0 0 0 10
4ENC_A 0.60 0.37 1.00 7 1319 0 0 0 0 12

^top



Performance of RNASampler(20) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 457
Total TN 191070
Total FP 145
Total FP CONTRA 20
Total FP INCONS 71
Total FP COMP 54
Total FN 459
Total Scores
MCC 0.644
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.662 ± 0.076
Sensitivity 0.499
Positive Predictive Value 0.834
Nr of predictions 23

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2WRQ_Y 0.57 0.59 0.56 10 2832 13 5 3 5 7
2XQD_Y 0.88 0.78 1.00 21 2829 0 0 0 0 6
3A2K_C 0.86 0.75 1.00 21 2905 0 0 0 0 7
3AMU_B 0.82 0.70 0.95 19 2983 3 0 1 2 8
3GX2_A 0.74 0.55 1.00 22 4349 1 0 0 1 18
3IVN_B 0.78 0.61 1.00 19 2327 0 0 0 0 12
3IZ4_A 0.47 0.32 0.69 42 70815 23 6 13 4 90
3IZF_C 0.74 0.57 0.97 31 6871 1 0 1 0 23
3JYV_7 0.81 0.66 1.00 21 2829 0 0 0 0 11
3JYX_4 0.32 0.30 0.34 10 12217 26 4 15 7 23
3JYX_3 0.58 0.44 0.75 12 6312 11 0 4 7 15
3LA5_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2465 0 0 0 0 14
3NPB_A 0.68 0.48 0.96 22 6998 4 1 0 3 24
3O58_3 0.43 0.34 0.55 12 12381 18 2 8 8 23
3O58_2 0.79 0.71 0.87 27 7229 5 2 2 1 11
3PDR_A 0.70 0.53 0.93 38 12839 5 0 3 2 34
3RKF_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2191 0 0 0 0 14
3SD1_A 0.67 0.48 0.95 20 3895 1 0 1 0 22
4A1C_3 0.74 0.56 1.00 30 7110 0 0 0 0 24
4A1C_2 0.18 0.15 0.23 5 11759 30 0 17 13 28
4AOB_A 0.58 0.40 0.85 17 4351 4 0 3 1 25
4ENB_A 0.60 0.37 1.00 7 1268 0 0 0 0 12
4ENC_A 0.76 0.58 1.00 11 1315 0 0 0 0 8

^top


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