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 RNAshapes - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

  4. Performance of RSpredict(20) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric RNAshapes RSpredict(20)
MCC 0.563 > 0.559
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.574 ± 0.094 > 0.566 ± 0.099
Sensitivity 0.492 > 0.446
Positive Predictive Value 0.648 < 0.705
Total TP 456 > 413
Total TN 191320 < 191438
Total FP 317 > 207
Total FP CONTRA 37 < 42
Total FP INCONS 211 > 131
Total FP COMP 69 > 34
Total FN 471 < 514
P-value 0.00701036536754

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of RNAshapes and RSpredict(20). 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 RNAshapes and RSpredict(20)).

  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 RNAshapes and RSpredict(20)).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for RNAshapes and RSpredict(20). 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 RNAshapes and RSpredict(20)).

^top





Performance of RNAshapes - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNAshapes

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 456
Total TN 191320
Total FP 317
Total FP CONTRA 37
Total FP INCONS 211
Total FP COMP 69
Total FN 471
Total Scores
MCC 0.563
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.574 ± 0.094
Sensitivity 0.492
Positive Predictive Value 0.648
Nr of predictions 24

^top



2. Individual counts for RNAshapes [ 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 0.59 0.59 0.59 10 2833 12 4 3 5 7
2XQD_Y 0.64 0.56 0.75 15 2830 5 0 5 0 12
3A2K_C 0.42 0.39 0.46 11 2902 13 2 11 0 17
3AMU_B 0.70 0.59 0.84 16 2984 5 0 3 2 11
3GX2_A 0.76 0.63 0.93 25 4344 3 0 2 1 15
3IVN_B 0.78 0.61 1.00 19 2327 0 0 0 0 12
3IZ4_A 0.52 0.45 0.60 60 70776 45 6 34 5 72
3IZF_C 0.59 0.52 0.68 28 6862 13 1 12 0 26
3JYV_7 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 2830 20 0 20 0 32
3JYX_4 0.31 0.30 0.31 10 12214 35 5 17 13 23
3JYX_3 0.63 0.63 0.63 17 6301 21 1 9 11 10
3LA5_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2465 0 0 0 0 14
3NPB_A 0.77 0.63 0.94 29 6990 4 1 1 2 17
3O58_2 0.60 0.61 0.59 23 7221 18 4 12 2 15
3O58_3 0.34 0.34 0.34 12 12368 37 2 21 14 23
3PDR_A 0.67 0.56 0.80 40 12830 12 0 10 2 32
3RKF_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2191 0 0 0 0 14
3SD1_A 0.64 0.52 0.79 22 3888 6 1 5 0 20
4A1C_3 0.68 0.57 0.82 31 7102 7 1 6 0 23
4A1C_2 0.14 0.15 0.14 5 11746 41 5 25 11 28
4AOB_A 0.50 0.40 0.63 17 4344 11 2 8 1 25
4ENB_A 0.70 0.58 0.85 11 1262 2 1 1 0 8
4ENC_A 0.32 0.26 0.42 5 1314 7 1 6 0 14

^top



Performance of RSpredict(20) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 413
Total TN 191438
Total FP 207
Total FP CONTRA 42
Total FP INCONS 131
Total FP COMP 34
Total FN 514
Total Scores
MCC 0.559
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.566 ± 0.099
Sensitivity 0.446
Positive Predictive Value 0.705
Nr of predictions 24

^top



2. Individual counts for RSpredict(20) [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KDQ_B 0.85 0.73 1.00 8 398 0 0 0 0 3
2WRQ_Y 0.57 0.59 0.56 10 2832 11 5 3 3 7
2XQD_Y 0.88 0.78 1.00 21 2829 0 0 0 0 6
3A2K_C 0.78 0.68 0.90 19 2905 2 0 2 0 9
3AMU_B 0.61 0.41 0.92 11 2991 1 0 1 0 16
3GX2_A 0.33 0.15 0.75 6 4363 2 0 2 0 34
3IVN_B 0.78 0.65 0.95 20 2325 1 0 1 0 11
3IZ4_A 0.53 0.43 0.65 57 70788 35 8 23 4 75
3IZF_C 0.75 0.61 0.92 33 6867 3 1 2 0 21
3JYV_7 0.77 0.63 0.95 20 2829 1 0 1 0 12
3JYX_4 0.28 0.27 0.30 9 12216 33 5 16 12 24
3JYX_3 0.61 0.56 0.68 15 6306 13 0 7 6 12
3LA5_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2465 0 0 0 0 14
3NPB_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 7015 6 1 5 0 46
3O58_2 0.76 0.76 0.76 29 7222 10 3 6 1 9
3O58_3 0.32 0.34 0.30 12 12363 28 12 16 0 23
3PDR_A 0.67 0.49 0.92 35 12842 5 0 3 2 37
3RKF_A 0.77 0.62 0.95 21 2189 1 0 1 0 13
3SD1_A 0.68 0.60 0.78 25 3884 7 1 6 0 17
4A1C_3 0.48 0.33 0.69 18 7114 8 0 8 0 36
4A1C_2 0.19 0.18 0.20 6 11751 30 6 18 6 27
4AOB_A 0.28 0.14 0.55 6 4360 5 0 5 0 36
4ENB_A 0.48 0.32 0.75 6 1267 2 0 2 0 13
4ENC_A 0.45 0.32 0.67 6 1317 3 0 3 0 13

^top


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