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 CentroidHomfold‑LAST - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric Multilign(seed) CentroidHomfold‑LAST
MCC 0.734 > 0.710
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.740 ± 0.146 > 0.679 ± 0.128
Sensitivity 0.733 > 0.608
Positive Predictive Value 0.737 < 0.831
Total TP 493 > 409
Total TN 383507 < 383684
Total FP 263 > 113
Total FP CONTRA 42 > 17
Total FP INCONS 134 > 66
Total FP COMP 87 > 30
Total FN 180 < 264
P-value 1.50834591464e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of Multilign(seed) and CentroidHomfold-LAST. 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 CentroidHomfold‑LAST).

  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 CentroidHomfold‑LAST).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for Multilign(seed) and CentroidHomfold-LAST. 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 CentroidHomfold‑LAST).

^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 493
Total TN 383507
Total FP 263
Total FP CONTRA 42
Total FP INCONS 134
Total FP COMP 87
Total FN 180
Total Scores
MCC 0.734
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.740 ± 0.146
Sensitivity 0.733
Positive Predictive Value 0.737
Nr of predictions 10

^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_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_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 CentroidHomfold‑LAST - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for CentroidHomfold‑LAST

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 409
Total TN 383684
Total FP 113
Total FP CONTRA 17
Total FP INCONS 66
Total FP COMP 30
Total FN 264
Total Scores
MCC 0.710
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.679 ± 0.128
Sensitivity 0.608
Positive Predictive Value 0.831
Nr of predictions 10

^top



2. Individual counts for CentroidHomfold‑LAST [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
RFA_00619 - 0.29 0.23 0.36 9 22766 23 3 13 7 30
RFA_00626 0.85 0.79 0.92 69 56541 13 1 5 7 18
RFA_00628 0.86 0.78 0.94 67 57220 7 1 3 3 19
RFA_00630 0.87 0.83 0.92 72 56875 10 1 5 4 15
RFA_00816 0.80 0.63 1.00 26 23194 1 0 0 1 15
RFA_00817 0.68 0.59 0.80 24 21915 9 2 4 3 17
RFA_00818 0.57 0.54 0.61 22 20265 18 8 6 4 19
SRP_00241 0.65 0.51 0.82 42 46005 10 0 9 1 40
SRP_00331 0.60 0.53 0.69 46 37608 21 1 20 0 41
SRP_00340 0.61 0.39 0.97 32 41295 1 0 1 0 50

^top


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