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 Vsfold5 - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric RNASampler(20) Vsfold5
MCC 0.640 > 0.425
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.667 ± 0.075 > 0.475 ± 0.124
Sensitivity 0.491 > 0.358
Positive Predictive Value 0.839 > 0.511
Total TP 483 > 352
Total TN 198829 > 198716
Total FP 147 < 388
Total FP CONTRA 21 < 38
Total FP INCONS 72 < 299
Total FP COMP 54 > 51
Total FN 501 < 632
P-value 5.19332990918e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

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

^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 483
Total TN 198829
Total FP 147
Total FP CONTRA 21
Total FP INCONS 72
Total FP COMP 54
Total FN 501
Total Scores
MCC 0.640
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.667 ± 0.075
Sensitivity 0.491
Positive Predictive Value 0.839
Nr of predictions 25

^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
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 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
3G4S_9 0.50 0.28 0.89 16 7363 2 1 1 0 41
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_3 0.58 0.44 0.75 12 6312 11 0 4 7 15
3JYX_4 0.32 0.30 0.34 10 12217 26 4 15 7 23
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_2 0.79 0.71 0.87 27 7229 5 2 2 1 11
3O58_3 0.43 0.34 0.55 12 12381 18 2 8 8 23
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



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.