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 RNAwolf - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric RNASampler(seed) RNAwolf
MCC 0.779 > 0.287
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.774 ± 0.092 > 0.265 ± 0.122
Sensitivity 0.659 > 0.307
Positive Predictive Value 0.921 > 0.270
Total TP 442 > 206
Total TN 413762 > 413479
Total FP 105 < 747
Total FP CONTRA 9 < 144
Total FP INCONS 29 < 413
Total FP COMP 67 < 190
Total FN 229 < 465
P-value 1.42300079339e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

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

^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 RNAwolf - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNAwolf

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 206
Total TN 413479
Total FP 747
Total FP CONTRA 144
Total FP INCONS 413
Total FP COMP 190
Total FN 465
Total Scores
MCC 0.287
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.265 ± 0.122
Sensitivity 0.307
Positive Predictive Value 0.270
Nr of predictions 12

^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_00606 0.39 0.41 0.36 16 21277 43 8 20 15 23
RFA_00620 0.21 0.23 0.19 9 21898 49 10 28 11 30
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_00814 0.20 0.22 0.18 9 25149 62 12 30 20 32
RFA_00815 0.47 0.54 0.41 22 24477 47 14 18 15 19
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

^top


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