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 CentroidHomfold‑LAST - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

  5. Compile and download dataset for CentroidHomfold‑LAST & RNASLOpt [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric CentroidHomfold‑LAST RNASLOpt
MCC 0.515 > 0.443
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.442 ± 0.191 > 0.409 ± 0.141
Sensitivity 0.365 = 0.365
Positive Predictive Value 0.734 > 0.547
Total TP 146 = 146
Total TN 51878 > 51810
Total FP 60 < 130
Total FP CONTRA 5 < 15
Total FP INCONS 48 < 106
Total FP COMP 7 < 9
Total FN 254 = 254
P-value 2.57237423209e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of CentroidHomfold-LAST and RNASLOpt. 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 CentroidHomfold‑LAST and RNASLOpt).

  2. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for CentroidHomfold-LAST and RNASLOpt. 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 CentroidHomfold‑LAST and RNASLOpt).

^top





Performance of CentroidHomfold‑LAST - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for CentroidHomfold‑LAST

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 146
Total TN 51878
Total FP 60
Total FP CONTRA 5
Total FP INCONS 48
Total FP COMP 7
Total FN 254
Total Scores
MCC 0.515
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.442 ± 0.191
Sensitivity 0.365
Positive Predictive Value 0.734
Nr of predictions 14

^top



2. Individual counts for CentroidHomfold‑LAST [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1529 11 0 11 0 20
2LKR_A - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 6101 4 0 4 0 39
3J0L_7 - 0.60 0.41 0.88 7 1217 1 0 1 0 10
3J0L_2 - 0.49 0.24 1.00 8 6208 0 0 0 0 25
3J0L_g - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 465 0 0 0 0 4
3J0L_a - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1125 3 0 3 0 16
3J16_L 0.75 0.57 1.00 17 2758 0 0 0 0 13
3U4M_B - 0.58 0.43 0.80 16 3140 4 0 4 0 21
3UZL_B 0.72 0.54 0.95 20 3549 1 0 1 0 17
4A1C_2 0.16 0.15 0.18 5 11753 29 5 18 6 28
4A1C_3 0.68 0.56 0.83 30 7104 6 0 6 0 24
4AOB_A 0.71 0.50 1.00 21 4350 1 0 0 1 21
4ENB_A 0.76 0.58 1.00 11 1264 0 0 0 0 8
4ENC_A 0.76 0.58 1.00 11 1315 0 0 0 0 8

^top



Performance of RNASLOpt - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNASLOpt

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 146
Total TN 51810
Total FP 130
Total FP CONTRA 15
Total FP INCONS 106
Total FP COMP 9
Total FN 254
Total Scores
MCC 0.443
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.409 ± 0.141
Sensitivity 0.365
Positive Predictive Value 0.547
Nr of predictions 14

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.47 0.35 0.64 7 1529 4 0 4 0 13
2LKR_A - 0.68 0.62 0.75 24 6073 9 0 8 1 15
3J0L_7 - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1212 13 0 13 0 17
3J0L_2 - 0.39 0.36 0.43 12 6188 18 2 14 2 21
3J0L_g - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 461 4 1 3 0 4
3J0L_a - 0.26 0.19 0.38 3 1120 5 1 4 0 13
3J16_L 0.53 0.40 0.71 12 2758 5 0 5 0 18
3U4M_B - 0.38 0.32 0.46 12 3134 14 0 14 0 25
3UZL_B 0.48 0.32 0.71 12 3553 5 0 5 0 25
4A1C_2 0.23 0.24 0.22 8 11744 35 8 21 6 25
4A1C_3 0.67 0.52 0.88 28 7108 4 0 4 0 26
4AOB_A 0.26 0.19 0.38 8 4350 13 2 11 0 34
4ENB_A 0.76 0.58 1.00 11 1264 0 0 0 0 8
4ENC_A 0.65 0.47 0.90 9 1316 1 1 0 0 10

^top


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