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 PPfold(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

  4. Performance of CMfinder(seed) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric PPfold(seed) CMfinder(seed)
MCC 0.861 > 0.566
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.734 ± 0.102 > 0.581 ± 0.095
Sensitivity 0.774 > 0.427
Positive Predictive Value 0.959 > 0.752
Total TP 582 > 321
Total TN 366151 < 366331
Total FP 47 < 119
Total FP CONTRA 4 < 13
Total FP INCONS 21 < 93
Total FP COMP 22 > 13
Total FN 170 < 431
P-value 4.98172311752e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of PPfold(seed) and CMfinder(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 PPfold(seed) and CMfinder(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 PPfold(seed) and CMfinder(seed)).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for PPfold(seed) and CMfinder(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 PPfold(seed) and CMfinder(seed)).

^top





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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 582
Total TN 366151
Total FP 47
Total FP CONTRA 4
Total FP INCONS 21
Total FP COMP 22
Total FN 170
Total Scores
MCC 0.861
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.734 ± 0.102
Sensitivity 0.774
Positive Predictive Value 0.959
Nr of predictions 22

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
RFA_00626 0.94 0.89 1.00 77 56539 1 0 0 1 10
RFA_00627 0.95 0.91 1.00 79 56874 4 0 0 4 8
RFA_00628 0.95 0.91 1.00 78 57213 2 0 0 2 8
RFA_00630 0.91 0.85 0.97 74 56877 5 0 2 3 13
RFA_00654 0.23 0.17 0.33 3 2406 6 0 6 0 15
RFA_00658 0.38 0.14 1.00 2 1126 1 0 0 1 12
RFA_00664 0.38 0.14 1.00 2 988 1 0 0 1 12
RFA_00708 0.38 0.14 1.00 2 1033 1 0 0 1 12
RFA_00749 0.78 0.75 0.82 9 892 2 0 2 0 3
RFA_00764 0.78 0.75 0.82 9 892 2 0 2 0 3
RFA_00765 0.78 0.75 0.82 9 892 2 0 2 0 3
RFA_00769 0.68 0.56 0.83 10 1941 2 1 1 0 8
RFA_00770 0.68 0.56 0.83 10 2004 2 1 1 0 8
RFA_00773 0.68 0.56 0.83 10 1941 2 1 1 0 8
RFA_00779 0.68 0.56 0.83 10 1941 2 1 1 0 8
RFA_00808 0.75 0.56 1.00 9 2007 0 0 0 0 7
RFA_00809 0.50 0.38 0.67 6 2136 3 0 3 0 10
RFA_00814 0.94 0.88 1.00 36 25164 2 0 0 2 5
RFA_00816 0.95 0.90 1.00 37 23183 2 0 0 2 4
RFA_00817 0.95 0.90 1.00 37 21908 1 0 0 1 4
RFA_00818 0.94 0.88 1.00 36 20265 2 0 0 2 5
RFA_00819 0.95 0.90 1.00 37 27929 2 0 0 2 4

^top



Performance of CMfinder(seed) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 321
Total TN 366331
Total FP 119
Total FP CONTRA 13
Total FP INCONS 93
Total FP COMP 13
Total FN 431
Total Scores
MCC 0.566
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.581 ± 0.095
Sensitivity 0.427
Positive Predictive Value 0.752
Nr of predictions 22

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
RFA_00626 0.44 0.32 0.60 28 56569 22 2 17 3 59
RFA_00627 0.53 0.39 0.72 34 56906 15 3 10 2 53
RFA_00628 0.58 0.43 0.77 37 57243 14 3 8 3 49
RFA_00630 0.45 0.32 0.64 28 56909 17 3 13 1 59
RFA_00654 0.38 0.22 0.67 4 2409 2 0 2 0 14
RFA_00658 0.40 0.29 0.57 4 1121 4 0 3 1 10
RFA_00664 0.40 0.29 0.57 4 983 4 0 3 1 10
RFA_00708 0.40 0.29 0.57 4 1028 4 0 3 1 10
RFA_00749 0.91 0.83 1.00 10 893 0 0 0 0 2
RFA_00764 0.91 0.83 1.00 10 893 0 0 0 0 2
RFA_00765 0.91 0.83 1.00 10 893 0 0 0 0 2
RFA_00769 0.71 0.50 1.00 9 1944 0 0 0 0 9
RFA_00770 0.71 0.50 1.00 9 2007 0 0 0 0 9
RFA_00773 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1949 4 0 4 0 18
RFA_00779 0.71 0.50 1.00 9 1944 0 0 0 0 9
RFA_00808 0.68 0.56 0.82 9 2005 2 0 2 0 7
RFA_00809 0.41 0.38 0.46 6 2132 7 1 6 0 10
RFA_00814 0.68 0.51 0.91 21 25177 2 0 2 0 20
RFA_00816 0.68 0.51 0.91 21 23197 2 0 2 0 20
RFA_00817 0.68 0.56 0.82 23 21917 5 0 5 0 18
RFA_00818 0.60 0.49 0.74 20 20274 8 1 6 1 21
RFA_00819 0.62 0.51 0.75 21 27938 7 0 7 0 20

^top


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