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 RNAsubopt - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric RNAsubopt RSpredict(20)
MCC 0.560 > 0.559
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.571 ± 0.100 > 0.566 ± 0.099
Sensitivity 0.502 > 0.446
Positive Predictive Value 0.629 < 0.705
Total TP 465 > 413
Total TN 191285 < 191438
Total FP 322 > 207
Total FP CONTRA 47 > 42
Total FP INCONS 227 > 131
Total FP COMP 48 > 34
Total FN 462 < 514
P-value 0.590817397584

^top




Performance plots


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

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

^top





Performance of RNAsubopt - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNAsubopt

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 465
Total TN 191285
Total FP 322
Total FP CONTRA 47
Total FP INCONS 227
Total FP COMP 48
Total FN 462
Total Scores
MCC 0.560
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.571 ± 0.100
Sensitivity 0.502
Positive Predictive Value 0.629
Nr of predictions 24

^top



2. Individual counts for RNAsubopt [ 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 0.75 0.67 0.86 18 2829 3 0 3 0 9
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 0.44 0.38 0.54 15 4343 14 1 12 1 25
3IVN_B 0.76 0.58 1.00 18 2328 0 0 0 0 13
3IZ4_A 0.51 0.47 0.56 62 70766 49 8 40 1 70
3IZF_C 0.70 0.61 0.80 33 6862 8 1 7 0 21
3JYV_7 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 2829 21 0 21 0 32
3JYX_4 0.19 0.21 0.17 7 12204 38 11 24 3 26
3JYX_3 0.63 0.63 0.63 17 6301 21 1 9 11 10
3LA5_A 0.78 0.62 1.00 21 2464 0 0 0 0 13
3NPB_A 0.75 0.65 0.86 30 6986 7 1 4 2 16
3O58_2 0.72 0.74 0.70 28 7220 13 4 8 1 10
3O58_3 0.34 0.34 0.34 12 12368 34 2 21 11 23
3PDR_A 0.75 0.63 0.90 45 12830 7 1 4 2 27
3RKF_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2191 0 0 0 0 14
3SD1_A 0.61 0.50 0.75 21 3888 7 1 6 0 21
4A1C_3 0.70 0.59 0.82 32 7101 7 1 6 0 22
4A1C_2 0.14 0.15 0.13 5 11742 43 5 29 9 28
4AOB_A 0.52 0.43 0.64 18 4343 11 2 8 1 24
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 0 7 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.