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(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric PETfold_pre2.0(seed) CMfinder(seed)
MCC 0.666 > 0.443
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.661 ± 0.056 > 0.456 ± 0.186
Sensitivity 0.574 > 0.333
Positive Predictive Value 0.777 > 0.597
Total TP 143 > 83
Total TN 33752 < 33797
Total FP 43 < 57
Total FP CONTRA 17 > 3
Total FP INCONS 24 < 53
Total FP COMP 2 > 1
Total FN 106 < 166
P-value 9.16590079822e-09

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of PETfold_pre2.0(seed) 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 PETfold_pre2.0(seed) 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 PETfold_pre2.0(seed) and CMfinder(seed)).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for PETfold_pre2.0(seed) 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 PETfold_pre2.0(seed) and CMfinder(seed)).

^top





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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 143
Total TN 33752
Total FP 43
Total FP CONTRA 17
Total FP INCONS 24
Total FP COMP 2
Total FN 106
Total Scores
MCC 0.666
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.661 ± 0.056
Sensitivity 0.574
Positive Predictive Value 0.777
Nr of predictions 11

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
PDB_00005 0.80 0.64 1.00 9 937 0 0 0 0 5
PDB_00716 0.68 0.57 0.81 13 2685 3 0 3 0 10
PDB_01092 0.68 0.56 0.83 29 10118 8 0 6 2 23
RFA_00632 0.69 0.64 0.75 18 4071 6 2 4 0 10
RFA_00636 0.73 0.68 0.79 19 3981 5 2 3 0 9
RFA_00769 0.63 0.56 0.71 10 1939 4 3 1 0 8
RFA_00770 0.63 0.56 0.71 10 2002 4 3 1 0 8
RFA_00773 0.63 0.56 0.71 10 1939 4 3 1 0 8
RFA_00779 0.63 0.56 0.71 10 1939 4 3 1 0 8
RFA_00808 0.71 0.56 0.90 9 2006 1 1 0 0 7
RFA_00809 0.47 0.38 0.60 6 2135 4 0 4 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 83
Total TN 33797
Total FP 57
Total FP CONTRA 3
Total FP INCONS 53
Total FP COMP 1
Total FN 166
Total Scores
MCC 0.443
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.456 ± 0.186
Sensitivity 0.333
Positive Predictive Value 0.597
Nr of predictions 11

^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
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_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.