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 RNAsubopt - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric PPfold(seed) RNAsubopt
MCC 0.735 > 0.641
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.762 ± 0.075 > 0.635 ± 0.064
Sensitivity 0.691 > 0.658
Positive Predictive Value 0.783 > 0.626
Total TP 1194 > 1137
Total TN 916973 > 916682
Total FP 467 < 857
Total FP CONTRA 48 < 149
Total FP INCONS 283 < 530
Total FP COMP 136 < 178
Total FN 535 < 592
P-value 3.56938820447e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

  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 RNAsubopt).

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

^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 1194
Total TN 916973
Total FP 467
Total FP CONTRA 48
Total FP INCONS 283
Total FP COMP 136
Total FN 535
Total Scores
MCC 0.735
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.762 ± 0.075
Sensitivity 0.691
Positive Predictive Value 0.783
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_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 RNAsubopt - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNAsubopt

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 1137
Total TN 916682
Total FP 857
Total FP CONTRA 149
Total FP INCONS 530
Total FP COMP 178
Total FN 592
Total Scores
MCC 0.641
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.635 ± 0.064
Sensitivity 0.658
Positive Predictive Value 0.626
Nr of predictions 22

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
RFA_00626 0.68 0.66 0.70 57 56535 42 6 18 18 30
RFA_00627 0.72 0.68 0.77 59 56876 33 4 14 15 28
RFA_00628 0.89 0.86 0.91 74 57210 32 2 5 25 12
RFA_00630 0.58 0.60 0.57 52 56861 51 12 28 11 35
RFA_00814 0.39 0.39 0.39 16 25159 40 5 20 15 25
RFA_00816 0.74 0.78 0.70 32 23174 24 8 6 10 9
RFA_00817 0.35 0.41 0.30 17 21889 43 11 28 4 24
RFA_00818 0.47 0.54 0.41 22 20247 39 13 19 7 19
RFA_00819 0.96 0.95 0.98 39 27926 31 0 1 30 2
SRP_00079 0.71 0.73 0.70 64 41813 35 4 24 7 24
SRP_00099 0.61 0.63 0.60 60 44750 42 7 33 2 35
SRP_00124 0.67 0.67 0.68 57 37044 30 4 23 3 28
SRP_00182 0.70 0.68 0.71 69 45959 31 2 26 3 32
SRP_00241 0.55 0.59 0.52 48 45963 48 12 33 3 34
SRP_00252 0.53 0.56 0.50 50 49041 53 13 37 3 39
SRP_00253 0.64 0.67 0.61 60 49357 43 6 32 5 30
SRP_00257 0.80 0.81 0.79 87 50930 26 4 19 3 21
SRP_00260 0.64 0.69 0.60 69 47780 48 7 39 2 31
SRP_00328 0.64 0.66 0.63 56 39532 38 8 25 5 29
SRP_00329 0.61 0.62 0.60 53 39814 37 10 26 1 32
SRP_00331 0.55 0.55 0.55 48 37587 43 3 37 3 39
SRP_00340 0.55 0.59 0.52 48 41235 48 8 37 3 34

^top


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