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 Murlet(20) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric PETfold_pre2.0(seed) Murlet(20)
MCC 0.765 > 0.621
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.768 ± 0.070 > 0.620 ± 0.161
Sensitivity 0.733 > 0.544
Positive Predictive Value 0.799 > 0.708
Total TP 3189 > 2368
Total TN 12464831 < 12465477
Total FP 1270 > 1159
Total FP CONTRA 126 < 149
Total FP INCONS 676 < 828
Total FP COMP 468 > 182
Total FN 1160 < 1981
P-value 0.0

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of PETfold_pre2.0(seed) and Murlet(20). 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 Murlet(20)).

  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 Murlet(20)).

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

^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 3189
Total TN 12464831
Total FP 1270
Total FP CONTRA 126
Total FP INCONS 676
Total FP COMP 468
Total FN 1160
Total Scores
MCC 0.765
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.768 ± 0.070
Sensitivity 0.733
Positive Predictive Value 0.799
Nr of predictions 9

^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
CRW_00177 0.84 0.82 0.86 386 1178430 105 17 47 41 87
CRW_00250 0.84 0.82 0.87 391 1198474 97 16 45 36 87
CRW_00278 0.84 0.82 0.85 369 1129823 106 15 49 42 81
CRW_00280 0.84 0.83 0.85 377 1117815 109 16 52 41 76
CRW_00330 0.64 0.59 0.69 307 1988567 210 13 128 69 210
CRW_00411 0.67 0.64 0.71 318 1615053 200 15 117 68 178
CRW_00414 0.64 0.61 0.67 303 1665770 223 20 132 71 192
CRW_00789 0.83 0.81 0.86 362 1137365 112 11 48 53 85
PDB_01105 0.77 0.70 0.86 376 1433534 108 3 58 47 164

^top



Performance of Murlet(20) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Murlet(20)

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 2368
Total TN 12465477
Total FP 1159
Total FP CONTRA 149
Total FP INCONS 828
Total FP COMP 182
Total FN 1981
Total Scores
MCC 0.621
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.620 ± 0.161
Sensitivity 0.544
Positive Predictive Value 0.708
Nr of predictions 9

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
CRW_00177 0.75 0.70 0.81 330 1178473 93 14 63 16 143
CRW_00250 0.75 0.68 0.84 325 1198537 73 14 50 9 153
CRW_00278 0.75 0.67 0.83 302 1129893 75 12 49 14 148
CRW_00280 0.78 0.72 0.85 328 1117874 75 11 47 17 125
CRW_00330 0.39 0.31 0.49 160 1988690 189 26 139 24 357
CRW_00411 0.31 0.25 0.40 122 1615195 206 23 163 20 374
CRW_00414 0.33 0.29 0.36 146 1665818 288 38 223 27 349
CRW_00789 0.78 0.71 0.86 318 1137416 79 8 44 27 129
PDB_01105 0.73 0.62 0.86 337 1433581 81 3 50 28 203

^top


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