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 Multilign(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

  5. Compile and download dataset for Multilign(seed) & CRWrnafold [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric Multilign(seed) CRWrnafold
MCC 0.681 > 0.453
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.547 ± 0.131 > 0.409 ± 0.121
Sensitivity 0.649 > 0.465
Positive Predictive Value 0.717 > 0.445
Total TP 576 > 413
Total TN 406244 > 406118
Total FP 315 < 605
Total FP CONTRA 48 < 140
Total FP INCONS 179 < 376
Total FP COMP 88 < 89
Total FN 312 < 475
P-value 5.19332990918e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of Multilign(seed) and CRWrnafold. 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 Multilign(seed) and CRWrnafold).

  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 Multilign(seed) and CRWrnafold).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for Multilign(seed) and CRWrnafold. 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 Multilign(seed) and CRWrnafold).

^top





Performance of Multilign(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Multilign(seed)

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 576
Total TN 406244
Total FP 315
Total FP CONTRA 48
Total FP INCONS 179
Total FP COMP 88
Total FN 312
Total Scores
MCC 0.681
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.547 ± 0.131
Sensitivity 0.649
Positive Predictive Value 0.717
Nr of predictions 23

^top



2. Individual counts for Multilign(seed) [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
RFA_00416 0.57 0.53 0.62 8 1472 6 1 4 1 7
RFA_00619 - 0.37 0.41 0.34 16 22744 36 12 19 5 23
RFA_00626 0.90 0.85 0.95 74 56538 20 0 4 16 13
RFA_00628 0.92 0.88 0.95 76 57211 18 0 4 14 10
RFA_00630 0.83 0.80 0.86 70 56872 29 0 11 18 17
RFA_00654 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2414 1 0 1 0 18
RFA_00658 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1128 0 0 0 0 14
RFA_00664 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 990 0 0 0 0 14
RFA_00708 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1035 0 0 0 0 14
RFA_00767 0.63 0.56 0.71 10 1877 4 0 4 0 8
RFA_00768 0.61 0.56 0.67 10 1876 5 0 5 0 8
RFA_00769 0.55 0.56 0.56 10 1935 8 3 5 0 8
RFA_00770 0.68 0.56 0.83 10 2004 2 0 2 0 8
RFA_00773 0.59 0.56 0.63 10 1937 6 1 5 0 8
RFA_00779 0.61 0.56 0.67 10 1938 5 0 5 0 8
RFA_00808 0.60 0.56 0.64 9 2002 5 0 5 0 7
RFA_00809 0.37 0.38 0.38 6 2129 10 1 9 0 10
RFA_00816 1.00 1.00 1.00 41 23179 12 0 0 12 0
RFA_00817 0.77 0.78 0.76 32 21903 13 5 5 3 9
RFA_00818 0.85 0.80 0.89 33 20264 12 1 3 8 8
SRP_00241 0.48 0.50 0.46 41 45967 50 15 33 2 41
SRP_00331 0.69 0.69 0.70 60 37589 29 2 24 3 27
SRP_00340 0.59 0.61 0.57 50 41240 44 7 31 6 32

^top



Performance of CRWrnafold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for CRWrnafold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 413
Total TN 406118
Total FP 605
Total FP CONTRA 140
Total FP INCONS 376
Total FP COMP 89
Total FN 475
Total Scores
MCC 0.453
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.409 ± 0.121
Sensitivity 0.465
Positive Predictive Value 0.445
Nr of predictions 23

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
RFA_00416 1.00 1.00 1.00 15 1470 3 0 0 3 0
RFA_00619 - 0.24 0.28 0.20 11 22737 54 14 29 11 28
RFA_00626 0.64 0.63 0.65 55 56532 42 8 21 13 32
RFA_00628 0.89 0.85 0.94 73 57213 30 0 5 25 13
RFA_00630 0.57 0.57 0.57 50 56865 51 12 26 13 37
RFA_00654 0.26 0.28 0.26 5 2396 14 2 12 0 13
RFA_00658 0.59 0.50 0.70 7 1118 4 0 3 1 7
RFA_00664 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 980 11 0 10 1 14
RFA_00708 0.35 0.29 0.44 4 1026 6 0 5 1 10
RFA_00767 0.59 0.56 0.63 10 1875 6 3 3 0 8
RFA_00768 0.47 0.44 0.50 8 1875 8 1 7 0 10
RFA_00769 0.54 0.56 0.53 10 1934 9 4 5 0 8
RFA_00770 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 2002 17 1 13 3 18
RFA_00773 0.59 0.56 0.63 10 1937 6 1 5 0 8
RFA_00779 0.59 0.56 0.63 10 1937 6 3 3 0 8
RFA_00808 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 2000 18 2 14 2 16
RFA_00809 0.40 0.38 0.43 6 2131 8 1 7 0 10
RFA_00816 0.21 0.24 0.19 10 23166 50 20 24 6 31
RFA_00817 0.10 0.12 0.08 5 21883 57 17 40 0 36
RFA_00818 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 20249 56 19 33 4 41
SRP_00241 0.54 0.57 0.51 47 45963 48 17 29 2 35
SRP_00331 0.41 0.41 0.42 36 37589 51 7 43 1 51
SRP_00340 0.48 0.50 0.47 41 41240 50 8 39 3 41

^top


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