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 RNASLOpt - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric PETfold_pre2.0(seed) RNASLOpt
MCC 0.867 > 0.591
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.836 ± 0.062 > 0.590 ± 0.115
Sensitivity 0.826 > 0.579
Positive Predictive Value 0.913 > 0.613
Total TP 502 > 352
Total TN 51427 > 51403
Total FP 151 < 305
Total FP CONTRA 17 < 71
Total FP INCONS 31 < 151
Total FP COMP 103 > 83
Total FN 106 < 256
P-value 5.1503931209e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

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

^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 502
Total TN 51427
Total FP 151
Total FP CONTRA 17
Total FP INCONS 31
Total FP COMP 103
Total FN 106
Total Scores
MCC 0.867
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.836 ± 0.062
Sensitivity 0.826
Positive Predictive Value 0.913
Nr of predictions 25

^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
2LC8_A 0.41 0.33 0.55 6 517 5 0 5 0 12
3J16_L 1.00 1.00 1.00 21 1138 1 0 0 1 0
3J20_1 1.00 1.00 1.00 20 1092 2 0 0 2 0
3J20_0 0.95 0.95 0.95 20 1198 2 1 0 1 1
3J2L_3 0.97 0.94 1.00 32 2988 5 0 0 5 2
3J3D_C 0.90 0.95 0.86 18 947 4 3 0 1 1
3J3E_8 0.71 0.67 0.77 10 2729 8 1 2 5 5
3J3E_7 0.97 0.97 0.97 33 2707 6 0 1 5 1
3J3F_7 0.99 0.97 1.00 35 2899 4 0 0 4 1
3J3F_8 0.86 0.84 0.89 16 4743 13 2 0 11 3
3J3V_B 0.90 0.89 0.92 24 2630 14 0 2 12 3
3UZL_B 0.93 0.88 1.00 14 1279 8 0 0 8 2
3W1K_J 0.85 0.81 0.89 25 1650 4 2 1 1 6
3W3S_B 0.80 0.73 0.89 24 1962 6 1 2 3 9
3ZEX_D 0.96 0.94 0.97 33 2762 6 0 1 5 2
3ZEX_C 0.70 0.59 0.85 17 5354 12 1 2 9 12
3ZND_W 0.67 0.75 0.60 6 1181 16 0 4 12 2
4A1C_2 0.79 0.75 0.83 15 4498 12 1 2 9 5
4A1C_3 1.00 1.00 1.00 37 2726 2 0 0 2 0
4AOB_A 0.85 0.79 0.92 23 1412 4 0 2 2 6
4ENB_A 0.61 0.53 0.73 8 461 5 1 2 2 7
4ENC_A 0.61 0.53 0.73 8 485 5 1 2 2 7
4FRG_B 0.87 0.83 0.91 20 1180 3 0 2 1 4
4FRN_A 0.83 0.79 0.88 22 1823 3 2 1 0 6
4JF2_A 0.76 0.63 0.94 15 1066 1 1 0 0 9

^top



Performance of RNASLOpt - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNASLOpt

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 352
Total TN 51403
Total FP 305
Total FP CONTRA 71
Total FP INCONS 151
Total FP COMP 83
Total FN 256
Total Scores
MCC 0.591
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.590 ± 0.115
Sensitivity 0.579
Positive Predictive Value 0.613
Nr of predictions 25

^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
2LC8_A 0.48 0.39 0.64 7 517 4 0 4 0 11
3J16_L 0.63 0.57 0.71 12 1142 5 0 5 0 9
3J20_1 1.00 1.00 1.00 20 1092 1 0 0 1 0
3J20_0 0.74 0.76 0.73 16 1197 7 3 3 1 5
3J2L_3 0.71 0.68 0.74 23 2989 11 0 8 3 11
3J3D_C 0.90 0.95 0.86 18 947 3 3 0 0 1
3J3E_8 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 2724 30 6 12 12 15
3J3E_7 0.61 0.56 0.68 19 2713 10 1 8 1 15
3J3F_7 0.21 0.22 0.22 8 2898 28 3 25 0 28
3J3F_8 0.39 0.47 0.32 9 4733 38 10 9 19 10
3J3V_B 0.60 0.59 0.62 16 2630 14 2 8 4 11
3UZL_B 0.55 0.50 0.62 8 1280 9 1 4 4 8
3W1K_J 0.93 0.90 0.97 28 1649 1 1 0 0 3
3W3S_B 0.90 0.85 0.97 28 1960 2 0 1 1 5
3ZEX_D 0.86 0.74 1.00 26 2770 4 0 0 4 9
3ZEX_C 0.32 0.34 0.31 10 5342 36 8 14 14 19
3ZND_W 0.26 0.38 0.19 3 1175 22 7 6 9 5
4A1C_2 0.30 0.40 0.24 8 4482 35 13 13 9 12
4A1C_3 0.79 0.73 0.87 27 2732 5 0 4 1 10
4AOB_A 0.31 0.28 0.38 8 1416 13 3 10 0 21
4ENB_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 461 0 0 0 0 4
4ENC_A 0.73 0.60 0.90 9 486 1 1 0 0 6
4FRG_B 0.60 0.58 0.64 14 1180 8 3 5 0 10
4FRN_A 0.19 0.18 0.22 5 1825 18 6 12 0 23
4JF2_A 0.89 0.79 1.00 19 1063 0 0 0 0 5

^top


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