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 CRWrnafold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric PPfold(seed) CRWrnafold
MCC 0.716 > 0.499
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.749 ± 0.077 > 0.465 ± 0.099
Sensitivity 0.652 > 0.509
Positive Predictive Value 0.787 > 0.491
Total TP 1226 > 956
Total TN 1050327 > 1049936
Total FP 467 < 1158
Total FP CONTRA 48 < 207
Total FP INCONS 283 < 785
Total FP COMP 136 < 166
Total FN 653 < 923
P-value 5.10776592382e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

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

^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 1226
Total TN 1050327
Total FP 467
Total FP CONTRA 48
Total FP INCONS 283
Total FP COMP 136
Total FN 653
Total Scores
MCC 0.716
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.749 ± 0.077
Sensitivity 0.652
Positive Predictive Value 0.787
Nr of predictions 23

^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_00805 0.46 0.21 1.00 32 133354 0 0 0 0 118
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
SRP_00079 0.74 0.69 0.79 61 41828 28 0 16 12 27
SRP_00099 0.60 0.59 0.62 56 44760 40 2 32 6 39
SRP_00124 0.71 0.66 0.76 56 37054 27 3 15 9 29
SRP_00182 0.85 0.78 0.92 79 45970 17 0 7 10 22
SRP_00241 0.53 0.52 0.54 43 45977 49 9 27 13 39
SRP_00252 0.64 0.63 0.64 56 49054 42 5 26 11 33
SRP_00253 0.64 0.62 0.66 56 49370 40 5 24 11 34
SRP_00257 0.51 0.44 0.59 48 50959 36 5 28 3 60
SRP_00260 0.56 0.51 0.61 51 47811 39 5 28 6 49
SRP_00328 0.61 0.56 0.67 48 39549 29 5 19 5 37
SRP_00329 0.72 0.67 0.78 57 39830 26 2 14 10 28
SRP_00331 0.63 0.59 0.69 51 37601 31 2 21 8 36
SRP_00340 0.54 0.50 0.59 41 41258 42 5 24 13 41

^top



Performance of CRWrnafold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for CRWrnafold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 956
Total TN 1049936
Total FP 1158
Total FP CONTRA 207
Total FP INCONS 785
Total FP COMP 166
Total FN 923
Total Scores
MCC 0.499
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.465 ± 0.099
Sensitivity 0.509
Positive Predictive Value 0.491
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_00626 0.64 0.63 0.65 55 56532 42 8 21 13 32
RFA_00627 0.65 0.63 0.67 55 56871 42 6 21 15 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_00805 0.48 0.48 0.49 72 133238 87 7 69 11 78
RFA_00814 0.24 0.27 0.21 11 25148 48 10 31 7 30
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
RFA_00819 0.44 0.44 0.44 18 27925 57 0 23 34 23
SRP_00079 0.47 0.47 0.48 41 41819 53 3 42 8 47
SRP_00099 0.61 0.63 0.59 60 44749 44 6 35 3 35
SRP_00124 0.30 0.29 0.30 25 37046 57 8 49 0 60
SRP_00182 0.72 0.72 0.72 73 45954 32 9 20 3 28
SRP_00241 0.54 0.57 0.51 47 45963 48 17 29 2 35
SRP_00252 0.27 0.28 0.26 25 49045 74 12 59 3 64
SRP_00253 0.34 0.37 0.32 33 49353 75 8 61 6 57
SRP_00257 0.81 0.79 0.83 85 50938 20 5 12 3 23
SRP_00260 0.73 0.73 0.74 73 47796 28 7 19 2 27
SRP_00328 0.55 0.55 0.55 47 39536 41 8 30 3 38
SRP_00329 0.25 0.25 0.25 21 39818 65 10 54 1 64
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.