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 RNAshapes - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric RNAshapes Carnac(seed)
MCC 0.469 > 0.000
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.458 ± 0.056 > 0.000 ± 0.000
Sensitivity 0.460 > 0.000
Positive Predictive Value 0.479 > 0.000
Total TP 1429 > 0
Total TN 1759820 < 1762803
Total FP 1734 > 0
Total FP CONTRA 195 > 0
Total FP INCONS 1359 > 0
Total FP COMP 180 > 0
Total FN 1677 < 3106
P-value 3.56938820447e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

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

^top





Performance of RNAshapes - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNAshapes

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 1429
Total TN 1759820
Total FP 1734
Total FP CONTRA 195
Total FP INCONS 1359
Total FP COMP 180
Total FN 1677
Total Scores
MCC 0.469
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.458 ± 0.056
Sensitivity 0.460
Positive Predictive Value 0.479
Nr of predictions 34

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
ASE_00001 0.65 0.61 0.69 46 34124 28 3 18 7 29
ASE_00002 0.47 0.45 0.49 33 35444 39 4 30 5 40
ASE_00009 0.40 0.37 0.43 25 26048 35 2 31 2 42
ASE_00014 0.12 0.12 0.13 13 54184 89 8 80 1 93
ASE_00116 0.14 0.14 0.15 9 31567 53 5 45 3 57
ASE_00120 0.30 0.29 0.31 27 46884 60 9 51 0 67
ASE_00121 0.32 0.32 0.33 29 45063 60 8 50 2 63
ASE_00145 0.36 0.35 0.38 39 70021 70 7 58 5 72
ASE_00154 0.54 0.52 0.55 56 65239 49 6 40 3 51
ASE_00187 0.41 0.40 0.43 46 68528 66 5 56 5 69
ASE_00196 0.49 0.49 0.49 37 31551 41 2 36 3 38
ASE_00205 0.46 0.47 0.45 42 45962 55 9 43 3 48
ASE_00209 0.49 0.45 0.53 40 42995 36 3 33 0 48
ASE_00210 0.55 0.55 0.55 36 27196 29 5 24 0 29
ASE_00213 0.30 0.29 0.32 19 27201 43 2 39 2 47
ASE_00346 0.35 0.34 0.37 33 48116 59 5 51 3 64
ASE_00359 0.63 0.60 0.66 48 42705 30 1 24 5 32
ASE_00360 0.29 0.29 0.29 19 29337 51 10 37 4 46
ASE_00417 0.35 0.36 0.34 36 54510 73 4 65 4 64
ASE_00418 0.33 0.33 0.32 25 38704 54 4 48 2 50
CRW_00016 0.49 0.48 0.51 57 77309 66 7 48 11 63
CRW_00610 0.55 0.53 0.57 43 36240 37 3 29 5 38
CRW_00613 0.64 0.58 0.70 45 34916 28 1 18 9 33
CRW_00618 0.17 0.18 0.16 11 56213 77 9 47 21 50
CRW_00633 0.55 0.54 0.56 57 63445 45 8 36 1 49
CRW_00634 0.33 0.34 0.33 32 64522 75 8 58 9 62
CRW_00670 0.74 0.72 0.76 86 70012 32 0 27 5 34
CRW_00671 0.65 0.62 0.67 73 62726 43 1 35 7 44
CRW_00672 0.66 0.66 0.66 73 72279 45 8 30 7 38
CRW_00674 0.68 0.67 0.69 83 83316 41 6 31 4 41
CRW_00676 0.58 0.62 0.55 71 93398 67 17 42 8 44
CRW_00692 0.43 0.46 0.40 41 68533 70 18 43 9 49
PDB_00827 0.64 0.56 0.74 45 26967 17 0 16 1 36
RFA_00598 0.53 0.53 0.53 54 84565 71 7 40 24 47

^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 0
Total TN 1762803
Total FP 0
Total FP CONTRA 0
Total FP INCONS 0
Total FP COMP 0
Total FN 3106
Total Scores
MCC 0.000
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.000 ± 0.000
Sensitivity 0.000
Positive Predictive Value 0.000
Nr of predictions 34

^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
ASE_00001 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 34191 0 0 0 0 75
ASE_00002 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 35511 0 0 0 0 73
ASE_00009 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 26106 0 0 0 0 67
ASE_00014 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 54285 0 0 0 0 106
ASE_00116 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 31626 0 0 0 0 66
ASE_00120 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 46971 0 0 0 0 94
ASE_00121 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 45150 0 0 0 0 92
ASE_00145 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 70125 0 0 0 0 111
ASE_00154 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 65341 0 0 0 0 107
ASE_00187 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 68635 0 0 0 0 115
ASE_00196 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 31626 0 0 0 0 75
ASE_00205 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 46056 0 0 0 0 90
ASE_00209 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 43071 0 0 0 0 88
ASE_00210 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 27261 0 0 0 0 65
ASE_00213 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 27261 0 0 0 0 66
ASE_00346 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 48205 0 0 0 0 97
ASE_00359 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 42778 0 0 0 0 80
ASE_00360 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 29403 0 0 0 0 65
ASE_00417 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 54615 0 0 0 0 100
ASE_00418 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 38781 0 0 0 0 75
CRW_00016 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 77421 0 0 0 0 120
CRW_00610 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 36315 0 0 0 0 81
CRW_00613 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 34980 0 0 0 0 78
CRW_00618 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 56280 0 0 0 0 61
CRW_00633 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 63546 0 0 0 0 106
CRW_00634 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 64620 0 0 0 0 94
CRW_00670 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 70125 0 0 0 0 120
CRW_00671 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 62835 0 0 0 0 117
CRW_00672 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 72390 0 0 0 0 111
CRW_00674 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 83436 0 0 0 0 124
CRW_00676 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 93528 0 0 0 0 115
CRW_00692 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 68635 0 0 0 0 90
PDB_00827 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 27028 0 0 0 0 81
RFA_00598 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 84666 0 0 0 0 101

^top


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