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 RNAwolf - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric PPfold(seed) RNAwolf
MCC 0.716 > 0.389
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.749 ± 0.077 > 0.362 ± 0.085
Sensitivity 0.652 > 0.408
Positive Predictive Value 0.787 > 0.373
Total TP 1226 > 767
Total TN 1050327 > 1049827
Total FP 467 < 1582
Total FP CONTRA 48 < 247
Total FP INCONS 283 < 1043
Total FP COMP 136 < 292
Total FN 653 < 1112
P-value 5.06544643719e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

  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 RNAwolf).

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

^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 RNAwolf - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNAwolf

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 767
Total TN 1049827
Total FP 1582
Total FP CONTRA 247
Total FP INCONS 1043
Total FP COMP 292
Total FN 1112
Total Scores
MCC 0.389
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.362 ± 0.085
Sensitivity 0.408
Positive Predictive Value 0.373
Nr of predictions 23

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
RFA_00626 0.08 0.09 0.08 8 56511 99 24 73 2 79
RFA_00627 0.38 0.39 0.37 34 56862 73 13 44 16 53
RFA_00628 0.58 0.57 0.59 49 57208 64 7 27 30 37
RFA_00630 0.48 0.47 0.49 41 56869 66 9 34 23 46
RFA_00805 0.30 0.31 0.29 47 133225 121 13 101 7 103
RFA_00814 0.20 0.22 0.18 9 25149 62 12 30 20 32
RFA_00816 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 23162 66 17 41 8 41
RFA_00817 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 21892 57 12 41 4 41
RFA_00818 0.25 0.27 0.23 11 20253 51 12 25 14 30
RFA_00819 0.16 0.17 0.16 7 27921 70 6 32 32 34
SRP_00079 0.53 0.55 0.51 48 41811 63 9 37 17 40
SRP_00099 0.55 0.57 0.53 54 44749 60 9 38 13 41
SRP_00124 0.54 0.56 0.53 48 37037 55 8 35 12 37
SRP_00182 0.34 0.35 0.34 35 45952 72 13 56 3 66
SRP_00241 0.55 0.60 0.51 49 45959 61 14 34 13 33
SRP_00252 0.32 0.35 0.30 31 49039 79 12 59 8 58
SRP_00253 0.22 0.24 0.20 22 49346 89 14 73 2 68
SRP_00257 0.68 0.69 0.67 75 50928 49 5 32 12 33
SRP_00260 0.58 0.60 0.57 60 47790 58 8 37 13 40
SRP_00328 0.32 0.33 0.31 28 39530 68 12 51 5 57
SRP_00329 0.31 0.33 0.30 28 39810 75 5 60 10 57
SRP_00331 0.61 0.61 0.61 53 37588 49 3 31 15 34
SRP_00340 0.34 0.37 0.33 30 41236 75 10 52 13 52

^top


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