CompaRNA - on-line benchmarks of RNA structure prediction methods

FAQ

Metric	RNASampler(20)		RNAalifold(seed)
MCC	0.589	>	0.578
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals	0.627 ± 0.111	>	0.578 ± 0.058
Sensitivity	0.441	>	0.364
Positive Predictive Value	0.790	<	0.919
Total TP	275	>	227
Total TN	149566	<	149667
Total FP	112	>	28
Total FP CONTRA	13	>	7
Total FP INCONS	60	>	13
Total FP COMP	39	>	8
Total FN	348	<	396
P-value	2.41358941668e-08

Comparison of performance of RNASampler(20) and RNAalifold(seed). 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 RNAalifold(seed)).
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 RNAalifold(seed)).
Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for RNASampler(20) and RNAalifold(seed). 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 RNAalifold(seed)).

Total Scores
MCC	0.589
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals	0.627 ± 0.111
Sensitivity	0.441
Positive Predictive Value	0.790
Nr of predictions	15

RNA Chain	Rfam family	MCC	SENS	PPV	TP	TN	FP	FP CONTRA	FP INCONS	FP COMP	FN
2KDQ_B	mir-TAR links to Rfam database...	0.95	0.91	1.00	10	396	0	0	0	0	1
3GX2_A	SAM links to Rfam database...	0.74	0.55	1.00	22	4349	1	0	0	1	18
3IVN_B	Purine links to Rfam database...	0.78	0.61	1.00	19	2327	0	0	0	0	12
3IZ4_A	tmRNA links to Rfam database...	0.47	0.32	0.69	42	70815	23	6	13	4	90
3JYX_4	5_8S_rRNA links to Rfam database...	0.32	0.30	0.34	10	12217	26	4	15	7	23
3LA5_A	Purine links to Rfam database...	0.76	0.59	1.00	20	2465	0	0	0	0	14
3NPB_A	SAM links to Rfam database...	0.68	0.48	0.96	22	6998	4	1	0	3	24
3O58_3	5_8S_rRNA links to Rfam database...	0.43	0.34	0.55	12	12381	18	2	8	8	23
3PDR_A	ykoK links to Rfam database...	0.70	0.53	0.93	38	12839	5	0	3	2	34
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...	0.67	0.48	0.95	20	3895	1	0	1	0	22
4A1C_2	5_8S_rRNA links to Rfam database...	0.18	0.15	0.23	5	11759	30	0	17	13	28
4AOB_A	SAM links to Rfam database...	0.58	0.40	0.85	17	4351	4	0	3	1	25
4ENB_A	crcB links to Rfam database...	0.60	0.37	1.00	7	1268	0	0	0	0	12
4ENC_A	crcB links to Rfam database...	0.76	0.58	1.00	11	1315	0	0	0	0	8

Total Scores
MCC	0.578
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals	0.578 ± 0.058
Sensitivity	0.364
Positive Predictive Value	0.919
Nr of predictions	15

RNA Chain	Rfam family	MCC	SENS	PPV	TP	TN	FP	FP CONTRA	FP INCONS	FP COMP	FN
2KDQ_B	mir-TAR links to Rfam database...	0.52	0.27	1.00	3	403	0	0	0	0	8
3GX2_A	SAM links to Rfam database...	0.74	0.55	1.00	22	4349	1	0	0	1	18
3IVN_B	Purine links to Rfam database...	0.61	0.48	0.79	15	2327	4	2	2	0	16
3IZ4_A	tmRNA links to Rfam database...	0.42	0.21	0.85	28	70843	5	1	4	0	104
3JYX_4	5_8S_rRNA links to Rfam database...	0.46	0.21	1.00	7	12239	2	0	0	2	26
3LA5_A	Purine links to Rfam database...	0.63	0.47	0.84	16	2466	3	1	2	0	18
3NPB_A	SAM links to Rfam database...	0.66	0.48	0.92	22	6997	3	1	1	1	24
3O58_3	5_8S_rRNA links to Rfam database...	0.51	0.26	1.00	9	12394	0	0	0	0	26
3PDR_A	ykoK links to Rfam database...	0.68	0.46	1.00	33	12847	1	0	0	1	39
3RKF_A	Purine links to Rfam database...	0.63	0.47	0.84	16	2192	3	1	2	0	18
3SD1_A	THF links to Rfam database...	0.58	0.40	0.85	17	3896	3	1	2	0	25
4A1C_2	5_8S_rRNA links to Rfam database...	0.39	0.15	1.00	5	11776	2	0	0	2	28
4AOB_A	SAM links to Rfam database...	0.72	0.52	1.00	22	4349	1	0	0	1	20
4ENB_A	crcB links to Rfam database...	0.56	0.32	1.00	6	1269	0	0	0	0	13
4ENC_A	crcB links to Rfam database...	0.56	0.32	1.00	6	1320	0	0	0	0	13

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