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 CentroidFold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric PPfold(seed) CentroidFold
MCC 0.716 > 0.655
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.749 ± 0.077 > 0.639 ± 0.076
Sensitivity 0.652 > 0.634
Positive Predictive Value 0.787 > 0.679
Total TP 1226 > 1191
Total TN 1050327 > 1050129
Total FP 467 < 705
Total FP CONTRA 48 < 116
Total FP INCONS 283 < 448
Total FP COMP 136 < 141
Total FN 653 < 688
P-value 5.19332990918e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

  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 CentroidFold).

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

^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 CentroidFold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for CentroidFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 1191
Total TN 1050129
Total FP 705
Total FP CONTRA 116
Total FP INCONS 448
Total FP COMP 141
Total FN 688
Total Scores
MCC 0.655
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.639 ± 0.076
Sensitivity 0.634
Positive Predictive Value 0.679
Nr of predictions 23

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
RFA_00626 0.90 0.86 0.95 75 56537 20 0 4 16 12
RFA_00627 0.87 0.82 0.93 71 56877 18 0 5 13 16
RFA_00628 0.90 0.86 0.94 74 57212 20 0 5 15 12
RFA_00630 0.80 0.76 0.85 66 56875 25 0 12 13 21
RFA_00805 0.80 0.64 1.00 96 133290 0 0 0 0 54
RFA_00814 0.70 0.51 0.95 21 25178 6 0 1 5 20
RFA_00816 0.75 0.73 0.77 30 23181 14 8 1 5 11
RFA_00817 0.13 0.12 0.14 5 21909 31 9 22 0 36
RFA_00818 0.54 0.54 0.54 22 20260 26 11 8 7 19
RFA_00819 0.49 0.37 0.65 15 27943 23 0 8 15 26
SRP_00079 0.63 0.61 0.64 54 41821 39 3 27 9 34
SRP_00099 0.62 0.62 0.63 59 44756 36 6 29 1 36
SRP_00124 0.63 0.60 0.66 51 37051 32 1 25 6 34
SRP_00182 0.58 0.56 0.61 57 45962 40 10 27 3 44
SRP_00241 0.52 0.55 0.49 45 45964 49 14 33 2 37
SRP_00252 0.54 0.56 0.53 50 49046 50 6 39 5 39
SRP_00253 0.47 0.48 0.47 43 49364 53 9 39 5 47
SRP_00257 0.85 0.82 0.87 89 50938 18 0 13 5 19
SRP_00260 0.71 0.73 0.70 73 47790 35 5 27 3 27
SRP_00328 0.60 0.61 0.58 52 39532 40 10 27 3 33
SRP_00329 0.62 0.61 0.63 52 39821 35 5 25 5 33
SRP_00331 0.53 0.53 0.53 46 37589 43 8 32 3 41
SRP_00340 0.51 0.55 0.47 45 41233 52 11 39 2 37

^top


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