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 RNASLOpt - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric RNASLOpt CMfinder(seed)
MCC 0.474 > 0.373
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.514 ± 0.098 > 0.410 ± 0.092
Sensitivity 0.443 > 0.200
Positive Predictive Value 0.510 < 0.698
Total TP 579 > 261
Total TN 666976 < 667737
Total FP 612 > 114
Total FP CONTRA 82 > 5
Total FP INCONS 474 > 108
Total FP COMP 56 > 1
Total FN 729 < 1047
P-value 5.02343278931e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of RNASLOpt and CMfinder(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 RNASLOpt and CMfinder(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 RNASLOpt and CMfinder(seed)).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for RNASLOpt and CMfinder(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 RNASLOpt and CMfinder(seed)).

^top





Performance of RNASLOpt - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNASLOpt

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 579
Total TN 666976
Total FP 612
Total FP CONTRA 82
Total FP INCONS 474
Total FP COMP 56
Total FN 729
Total Scores
MCC 0.474
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.514 ± 0.098
Sensitivity 0.443
Positive Predictive Value 0.510
Nr of predictions 22

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
CRW_00016 0.48 0.45 0.52 54 77317 58 5 45 8 66
CRW_00610 0.06 0.06 0.07 5 36246 64 9 55 0 76
CRW_00613 0.59 0.50 0.70 39 34924 24 1 16 7 39
CRW_00618 0.21 0.21 0.21 13 56218 62 6 43 13 48
CRW_00633 0.50 0.49 0.51 52 63444 52 5 45 2 54
CRW_00634 0.50 0.50 0.51 47 64527 48 11 35 2 47
CRW_00670 0.45 0.43 0.47 52 70015 58 8 50 0 68
CRW_00671 0.60 0.53 0.68 62 62744 32 2 27 3 55
CRW_00672 0.43 0.41 0.45 45 72291 57 6 48 3 66
CRW_00692 0.33 0.34 0.33 31 68540 77 20 44 13 59
PDB_00005 0.88 0.79 1.00 11 935 0 0 0 0 3
PDB_00716 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 2680 22 0 21 1 23
PDB_00827 0.74 0.60 0.91 49 26974 7 0 5 2 32
PDB_01092 0.74 0.63 0.87 33 10115 7 1 4 2 19
RFA_00632 0.59 0.57 0.62 16 4069 10 2 8 0 12
RFA_00636 0.65 0.64 0.67 18 3978 9 2 7 0 10
RFA_00769 0.59 0.56 0.63 10 1937 6 1 5 0 8
RFA_00770 0.47 0.39 0.58 7 2004 5 1 4 0 11
RFA_00773 0.59 0.56 0.63 10 1937 6 1 5 0 8
RFA_00779 0.74 0.56 1.00 10 1943 0 0 0 0 8
RFA_00808 0.75 0.56 1.00 9 2007 0 0 0 0 7
RFA_00809 0.40 0.38 0.43 6 2131 8 1 7 0 10

^top



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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 261
Total TN 667737
Total FP 114
Total FP CONTRA 5
Total FP INCONS 108
Total FP COMP 1
Total FN 1047
Total Scores
MCC 0.373
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.410 ± 0.092
Sensitivity 0.200
Positive Predictive Value 0.698
Nr of predictions 22

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
CRW_00016 0.36 0.14 0.89 17 77402 2 0 2 0 103
CRW_00610 0.49 0.31 0.78 25 36283 7 1 6 0 56
CRW_00613 0.54 0.33 0.87 26 34950 4 0 4 0 52
CRW_00618 0.36 0.13 1.00 8 56272 0 0 0 0 53
CRW_00633 0.32 0.12 0.81 13 63530 3 1 2 0 93
CRW_00634 0.40 0.17 0.94 16 64603 1 0 1 0 78
CRW_00670 0.32 0.18 0.55 22 70085 18 0 18 0 98
CRW_00671 0.20 0.09 0.41 11 62808 16 0 16 0 106
CRW_00672 0.38 0.15 0.94 17 72372 1 0 1 0 94
CRW_00692 0.41 0.17 1.00 15 68620 0 0 0 0 75
PDB_00005 0.47 0.36 0.63 5 938 3 0 3 0 9
PDB_00716 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 2688 13 0 13 0 23
PDB_00827 0.25 0.10 0.62 8 27015 5 0 5 0 73
PDB_01092 0.38 0.21 0.69 11 10137 6 0 5 1 41
RFA_00632 0.27 0.25 0.29 7 4071 17 0 17 0 21
RFA_00636 0.71 0.64 0.78 18 3982 5 2 3 0 10
RFA_00769 0.71 0.50 1.00 9 1944 0 0 0 0 9
RFA_00770 0.71 0.50 1.00 9 2007 0 0 0 0 9
RFA_00773 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1949 4 0 4 0 18
RFA_00779 0.71 0.50 1.00 9 1944 0 0 0 0 9
RFA_00808 0.68 0.56 0.82 9 2005 2 0 2 0 7
RFA_00809 0.41 0.38 0.46 6 2132 7 1 6 0 10

^top


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