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 Carnac(seed) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric Multilign(seed) Carnac(seed)
MCC 0.698 > 0.556
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.555 ± 0.136 > 0.449 ± 0.159
Sensitivity 0.660 > 0.330
Positive Predictive Value 0.741 < 0.940
Total TP 560 > 280
Total TN 383500 < 383958
Total FP 279 > 46
Total FP CONTRA 36 > 2
Total FP INCONS 160 > 16
Total FP COMP 83 > 28
Total FN 289 < 569
P-value 5.10776592382e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

  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 Carnac(seed)).

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

^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 560
Total TN 383500
Total FP 279
Total FP CONTRA 36
Total FP INCONS 160
Total FP COMP 83
Total FN 289
Total Scores
MCC 0.698
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.555 ± 0.136
Sensitivity 0.660
Positive Predictive Value 0.741
Nr of predictions 22

^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_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 Carnac(seed) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 280
Total TN 383958
Total FP 46
Total FP CONTRA 2
Total FP INCONS 16
Total FP COMP 28
Total FN 569
Total Scores
MCC 0.556
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.449 ± 0.159
Sensitivity 0.330
Positive Predictive Value 0.940
Nr of predictions 22

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
RFA_00416 0.93 0.93 0.93 14 1470 4 0 1 3 1
RFA_00626 0.67 0.52 0.87 45 56564 11 0 7 4 42
RFA_00628 0.66 0.43 1.00 37 57254 6 0 0 6 49
RFA_00630 0.79 0.67 0.94 58 56891 12 0 4 8 29
RFA_00654 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2415 0 0 0 0 18
RFA_00658 0.40 0.29 0.57 4 1121 5 0 3 2 10
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 0.74 0.56 1.00 10 1881 0 0 0 0 8
RFA_00768 0.74 0.56 1.00 10 1881 0 0 0 0 8
RFA_00769 0.71 0.56 0.91 10 1942 1 1 0 0 8
RFA_00770 0.62 0.39 1.00 7 2009 0 0 0 0 11
RFA_00773 0.71 0.56 0.91 10 1942 1 1 0 0 8
RFA_00779 0.74 0.56 1.00 10 1943 0 0 0 0 8
RFA_00808 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2016 0 0 0 0 16
RFA_00809 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2145 0 0 0 0 16
RFA_00816 0.66 0.44 1.00 18 23202 2 0 0 2 23
RFA_00817 0.80 0.66 0.96 27 21917 1 0 1 0 14
RFA_00818 0.70 0.49 1.00 20 20281 3 0 0 3 21
SRP_00241 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 46056 0 0 0 0 82
SRP_00331 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 37675 0 0 0 0 87
SRP_00340 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 41328 0 0 0 0 82

^top


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