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 PknotsRG - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric PknotsRG Carnac(seed)
MCC 0.819 > 0.582
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.854 ± 0.166 > 0.456 ± 0.229
Sensitivity 0.818 > 0.354
Positive Predictive Value 0.823 < 0.962
Total TP 233 > 101
Total TN 37435 < 37613
Total FP 71 > 5
Total FP CONTRA 9 > 3
Total FP INCONS 41 > 1
Total FP COMP 21 > 1
Total FN 52 < 184
P-value 1.34193807955e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of PknotsRG and Carnac(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 PknotsRG and Carnac(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 PknotsRG and Carnac(seed)).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for PknotsRG and Carnac(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 PknotsRG and Carnac(seed)).

^top





Performance of PknotsRG - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for PknotsRG

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 233
Total TN 37435
Total FP 71
Total FP CONTRA 9
Total FP INCONS 41
Total FP COMP 21
Total FN 52
Total Scores
MCC 0.819
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.854 ± 0.166
Sensitivity 0.818
Positive Predictive Value 0.823
Nr of predictions 13

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
PDB_00005 1.00 1.00 1.00 14 932 0 0 0 0 0
PDB_00716 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 2675 27 1 25 1 23
PDB_01092 0.71 0.67 0.74 35 10106 13 2 10 1 17
RFA_00632 0.88 0.89 0.86 25 4066 6 2 2 2 3
RFA_00636 0.95 0.96 0.93 27 3976 4 2 0 2 1
RFA_00767 1.00 1.00 1.00 18 1873 3 0 0 3 0
RFA_00768 1.00 1.00 1.00 18 1873 2 0 0 2 0
RFA_00769 0.97 1.00 0.95 18 1934 3 1 0 2 0
RFA_00770 0.88 0.78 1.00 14 2002 3 0 0 3 4
RFA_00773 0.97 1.00 0.95 18 1934 4 1 0 3 0
RFA_00779 0.97 0.94 1.00 17 1936 2 0 0 2 1
RFA_00808 1.00 1.00 1.00 16 2000 0 0 0 0 0
RFA_00809 0.79 0.81 0.76 13 2128 4 0 4 0 3

^top



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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 101
Total TN 37613
Total FP 5
Total FP CONTRA 3
Total FP INCONS 1
Total FP COMP 1
Total FN 184
Total Scores
MCC 0.582
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.456 ± 0.229
Sensitivity 0.354
Positive Predictive Value 0.962
Nr of predictions 13

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
PDB_00005 0.88 0.79 1.00 11 935 0 0 0 0 3
PDB_00716 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2701 0 0 0 0 23
PDB_01092 0.77 0.63 0.94 33 10118 3 1 1 1 19
RFA_00632 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 4095 0 0 0 0 28
RFA_00636 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 4005 0 0 0 0 28
RFA_00767 0.74 0.56 1.00 10 1881 0 0 0 0 8
RFA_00768 0.74 0.56 1.00 10 1881 0 0 0 0 8
RFA_00769 0.71 0.56 0.91 10 1942 1 1 0 0 8
RFA_00770 0.62 0.39 1.00 7 2009 0 0 0 0 11
RFA_00773 0.71 0.56 0.91 10 1942 1 1 0 0 8
RFA_00779 0.74 0.56 1.00 10 1943 0 0 0 0 8
RFA_00808 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2016 0 0 0 0 16
RFA_00809 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2145 0 0 0 0 16

^top


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