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 Mastr(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

  4. Performance of Vsfold5 - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

  5. Compile and download dataset for Mastr(20) & Vsfold5 [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric Mastr(20) Vsfold5
MCC 0.523 > 0.425
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.511 ± 0.127 > 0.475 ± 0.124
Sensitivity 0.348 < 0.358
Positive Predictive Value 0.790 > 0.511
Total TP 342 < 352
Total TN 198972 > 198716
Total FP 118 < 388
Total FP CONTRA 14 < 38
Total FP INCONS 77 < 299
Total FP COMP 27 < 51
Total FN 642 > 632
P-value 5.19332990918e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of Mastr(20) and Vsfold5. 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 Mastr(20) and Vsfold5).

  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 Mastr(20) and Vsfold5).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for Mastr(20) and Vsfold5. 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 Mastr(20) and Vsfold5).

^top





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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 342
Total TN 198972
Total FP 118
Total FP CONTRA 14
Total FP INCONS 77
Total FP COMP 27
Total FN 642
Total Scores
MCC 0.523
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.511 ± 0.127
Sensitivity 0.348
Positive Predictive Value 0.790
Nr of predictions 25

^top



2. Individual counts for Mastr(20) [ 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 0.72 0.61 0.85 17 2906 3 0 3 0 11
3AMU_B 0.77 0.59 1.00 16 2987 1 0 0 1 11
3G4S_9 0.48 0.32 0.75 18 7357 8 1 5 2 39
3GX2_A 0.39 0.28 0.55 11 4351 10 0 9 1 29
3IVN_B 0.78 0.65 0.95 20 2325 1 1 0 0 11
3IZ4_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 70876 0 0 0 0 132
3IZF_C 0.73 0.63 0.85 34 6863 7 1 5 1 20
3JYV_7 0.81 0.66 1.00 21 2829 0 0 0 0 11
3JYX_3 0.56 0.56 0.58 15 6302 23 1 10 12 12
3JYX_4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 12246 0 0 0 0 33
3LA5_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2465 0 0 0 0 14
3NPB_A 0.30 0.24 0.39 11 6993 18 1 16 1 35
3O58_2 0.76 0.76 0.76 29 7222 12 3 6 3 9
3O58_3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 12403 0 0 0 0 35
3PDR_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 12880 0 0 0 0 72
3RKF_A 0.70 0.50 1.00 17 2194 0 0 0 0 17
3SD1_A 0.61 0.50 0.75 21 3888 7 1 6 0 21
4A1C_3 0.70 0.59 0.84 32 7102 7 0 6 1 22
4A1C_2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 11781 0 0 0 0 33
4AOB_A 0.39 0.26 0.58 11 4352 9 0 8 1 31
4ENB_A 0.39 0.16 1.00 3 1272 0 0 0 0 16
4ENC_A 0.51 0.26 1.00 5 1321 0 0 0 0 14

^top



Performance of Vsfold5 - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Vsfold5

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 352
Total TN 198716
Total FP 388
Total FP CONTRA 38
Total FP INCONS 299
Total FP COMP 51
Total FN 632
Total Scores
MCC 0.425
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.475 ± 0.124
Sensitivity 0.358
Positive Predictive Value 0.511
Nr of predictions 25

^top



2. Individual counts for Vsfold5 [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KDQ_B 0.90 0.82 1.00 9 397 0 0 0 0 2
2WRQ_Y 0.53 0.53 0.53 9 2833 12 5 3 4 8
2XQD_Y 0.86 0.74 1.00 20 2830 0 0 0 0 7
3A2K_C 0.84 0.71 1.00 20 2906 0 0 0 0 8
3AMU_B 0.67 0.59 0.76 16 2982 7 0 5 2 11
3G4S_9 0.08 0.07 0.11 4 7344 33 0 33 0 53
3GX2_A 0.51 0.40 0.67 16 4347 9 0 8 1 24
3IVN_B 0.76 0.58 1.00 18 2328 0 0 0 0 13
3IZ4_A 0.29 0.24 0.36 32 70787 62 8 49 5 100
3IZF_C 0.70 0.56 0.88 30 6869 4 0 4 0 24
3JYV_7 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 2831 19 0 19 0 32
3JYX_3 0.17 0.15 0.20 4 6308 18 4 12 2 23
3JYX_4 0.31 0.30 0.31 10 12214 32 3 19 10 23
3LA5_A -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 2469 16 0 16 0 34
3NPB_A 0.57 0.46 0.72 21 6992 9 1 7 1 25
3O58_2 0.45 0.42 0.48 16 7227 19 3 14 2 22
3O58_3 0.39 0.37 0.41 13 12371 28 7 12 9 22
3PDR_A 0.57 0.44 0.74 32 12837 13 0 11 2 40
3RKF_A 0.75 0.65 0.88 22 2186 3 0 3 0 12
3SD1_A 0.11 0.10 0.15 4 3890 22 0 22 0 38
4A1C_3 0.26 0.22 0.32 12 7103 25 2 23 0 42
4A1C_2 0.24 0.24 0.24 8 11748 37 3 22 12 25
4AOB_A 0.18 0.14 0.25 6 4347 19 1 17 1 36
4ENB_A 0.89 0.79 1.00 15 1260 0 0 0 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.