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 RNASampler(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric RNASampler(20) Fold
MCC 0.633 > 0.581
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.654 ± 0.099 > 0.567 ± 0.118
Sensitivity 0.478 < 0.512
Positive Predictive Value 0.843 > 0.662
Total TP 322 < 345
Total TN 154834 > 154695
Total FP 94 < 213
Total FP CONTRA 11 < 24
Total FP INCONS 49 < 152
Total FP COMP 34 < 37
Total FN 352 > 329
P-value 2.18141491686e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

  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 RNASampler(20) and Fold).

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

^top





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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 322
Total TN 154834
Total FP 94
Total FP CONTRA 11
Total FP INCONS 49
Total FP COMP 34
Total FN 352
Total Scores
MCC 0.633
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.654 ± 0.099
Sensitivity 0.478
Positive Predictive Value 0.843
Nr of predictions 15

^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
2XQD_Y 0.88 0.78 1.00 21 2829 0 0 0 0 6
3AMU_B 0.82 0.70 0.95 19 2983 3 0 1 2 8
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
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_2 0.18 0.15 0.23 5 11759 30 0 17 13 28
4A1C_3 0.74 0.56 1.00 30 7110 0 0 0 0 24
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



Performance of Fold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Fold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 345
Total TN 154695
Total FP 213
Total FP CONTRA 24
Total FP INCONS 152
Total FP COMP 37
Total FN 329
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

^top



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

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

^top


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