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 PETfold_pre2.0(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

  4. Performance of RNASLOpt - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

  5. Compile and download dataset for PETfold_pre2.0(20) & RNASLOpt [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric PETfold_pre2.0(20) RNASLOpt
MCC 0.854 > 0.792
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.858 ± 0.048 > 0.807 ± 0.173
Sensitivity 0.759 > 0.692
Positive Predictive Value 0.962 > 0.911
Total TP 101 > 92
Total TN 14628 < 14632
Total FP 12 > 11
Total FP CONTRA 3 > 1
Total FP INCONS 1 < 8
Total FP COMP 8 > 2
Total FN 32 < 41
P-value 0.0

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of PETfold_pre2.0(20) and RNASLOpt. 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 PETfold_pre2.0(20) and RNASLOpt).

  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 PETfold_pre2.0(20) and RNASLOpt).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for PETfold_pre2.0(20) and RNASLOpt. 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 PETfold_pre2.0(20) and RNASLOpt).

^top





Performance of PETfold_pre2.0(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for PETfold_pre2.0(20)

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 101
Total TN 14628
Total FP 12
Total FP CONTRA 3
Total FP INCONS 1
Total FP COMP 8
Total FN 32
Total Scores
MCC 0.854
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.858 ± 0.048
Sensitivity 0.759
Positive Predictive Value 0.962
Nr of predictions 5

^top



2. Individual counts for PETfold_pre2.0(20) [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
PDB_00571 0.87 0.80 0.95 20 3300 1 1 0 0 5
PDB_00828 0.88 0.78 1.00 21 2464 2 0 0 2 6
PDB_00829 0.86 0.75 1.00 18 2260 2 0 0 2 6
PDB_01020 0.88 0.78 1.00 18 2260 3 0 0 3 5
PDB_01073 0.79 0.71 0.89 24 4344 4 2 1 1 10

^top



Performance of RNASLOpt - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNASLOpt

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 92
Total TN 14632
Total FP 11
Total FP CONTRA 1
Total FP INCONS 8
Total FP COMP 2
Total FN 41
Total Scores
MCC 0.792
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.807 ± 0.173
Sensitivity 0.692
Positive Predictive Value 0.911
Nr of predictions 5

^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
PDB_00571 0.87 0.80 0.95 20 3300 1 1 0 0 5
PDB_00828 0.88 0.78 1.00 21 2464 0 0 0 0 6
PDB_00829 0.86 0.75 1.00 18 2260 0 0 0 0 6
PDB_01020 0.86 0.74 1.00 17 2261 1 0 0 1 6
PDB_01073 0.56 0.47 0.67 16 4347 9 0 8 1 18

^top


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