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 RNASampler(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

  4. Performance of Murlet(seed) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric RNASampler(seed) Murlet(seed)
MCC 0.779 > 0.765
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.774 ± 0.092 > 0.675 ± 0.201
Sensitivity 0.659 > 0.595
Positive Predictive Value 0.921 < 0.985
Total TP 442 > 399
Total TN 413762 < 413837
Total FP 105 > 32
Total FP CONTRA 9 > 0
Total FP INCONS 29 > 6
Total FP COMP 67 > 26
Total FN 229 < 272
P-value 1.31583660336e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of RNASampler(seed) and Murlet(seed). 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 RNASampler(seed) and Murlet(seed)).

  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 RNASampler(seed) and Murlet(seed)).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for RNASampler(seed) and Murlet(seed). 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 RNASampler(seed) and Murlet(seed)).

^top





Performance of RNASampler(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNASampler(seed)

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 442
Total TN 413762
Total FP 105
Total FP CONTRA 9
Total FP INCONS 29
Total FP COMP 67
Total FN 229
Total Scores
MCC 0.779
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.774 ± 0.092
Sensitivity 0.659
Positive Predictive Value 0.921
Nr of predictions 12

^top



2. Individual counts for RNASampler(seed) [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
RFA_00606 0.44 0.36 0.54 14 21295 18 7 5 6 25
RFA_00620 0.52 0.44 0.63 17 21918 15 2 8 5 22
RFA_00626 0.80 0.64 1.00 56 56560 5 0 0 5 31
RFA_00627 0.77 0.63 0.93 55 56894 8 0 4 4 32
RFA_00628 0.78 0.64 0.95 55 57233 12 0 3 9 31
RFA_00630 0.77 0.66 0.90 57 56890 15 0 6 9 30
RFA_00814 0.87 0.78 0.97 32 25167 6 0 1 5 9
RFA_00815 0.88 0.78 1.00 32 24499 8 0 0 8 9
RFA_00816 0.86 0.76 0.97 31 23188 6 0 1 5 10
RFA_00817 0.86 0.76 0.97 31 21913 1 0 1 0 10
RFA_00818 0.86 0.73 1.00 30 20271 6 0 0 6 11
RFA_00819 0.88 0.78 1.00 32 27934 5 0 0 5 9

^top



Performance of Murlet(seed) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Murlet(seed)

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 399
Total TN 413837
Total FP 32
Total FP CONTRA 0
Total FP INCONS 6
Total FP COMP 26
Total FN 272
Total Scores
MCC 0.765
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.675 ± 0.201
Sensitivity 0.595
Positive Predictive Value 0.985
Nr of predictions 12

^top



2. Individual counts for Murlet(seed) [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
RFA_00606 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 21321 0 0 0 0 39
RFA_00620 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 21945 0 0 0 0 39
RFA_00626 0.81 0.66 1.00 57 56559 4 0 0 4 30
RFA_00627 0.84 0.70 1.00 61 56892 5 0 0 5 26
RFA_00628 0.83 0.69 1.00 59 57232 8 0 0 8 27
RFA_00630 0.82 0.67 1.00 58 56895 4 0 0 4 29
RFA_00814 0.75 0.63 0.90 26 25171 4 0 3 1 15
RFA_00815 0.83 0.68 1.00 28 24503 1 0 0 1 13
RFA_00816 0.75 0.63 0.90 26 23191 4 0 3 1 15
RFA_00817 0.83 0.68 1.00 28 21917 1 0 0 1 13
RFA_00818 0.83 0.68 1.00 28 20273 1 0 0 1 13
RFA_00819 0.83 0.68 1.00 28 27938 0 0 0 0 13

^top


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