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 RNAsubopt - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric PETfold_pre2.0(seed) RNAsubopt
MCC 0.867 > 0.635
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.836 ± 0.062 > 0.597 ± 0.120
Sensitivity 0.826 > 0.669
Positive Predictive Value 0.913 > 0.611
Total TP 502 > 407
Total TN 51427 > 51311
Total FP 151 < 364
Total FP CONTRA 17 < 80
Total FP INCONS 31 < 179
Total FP COMP 103 < 105
Total FN 106 < 201
P-value 5.02343278931e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

  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 RNAsubopt).

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

^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 RNAsubopt - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNAsubopt

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 407
Total TN 51311
Total FP 364
Total FP CONTRA 80
Total FP INCONS 179
Total FP COMP 105
Total FN 201
Total Scores
MCC 0.635
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.597 ± 0.120
Sensitivity 0.669
Positive Predictive Value 0.611
Nr of predictions 25

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A -0.03 0.00 0.00 0 513 15 3 12 0 18
3J16_L 0.49 0.52 0.48 11 1136 12 3 9 0 10
3J20_1 1.00 1.00 1.00 20 1092 3 0 0 3 0
3J20_0 0.51 0.57 0.48 12 1194 14 2 11 1 9
3J2L_3 0.80 0.82 0.78 28 2984 13 1 7 5 6
3J3D_C 0.65 0.74 0.58 14 944 10 5 5 0 5
3J3E_8 0.25 0.33 0.20 5 2717 32 7 13 12 10
3J3E_7 0.79 0.79 0.79 27 2707 12 2 5 5 7
3J3F_7 0.96 0.97 0.95 35 2897 4 1 1 2 1
3J3F_8 0.35 0.47 0.26 9 4726 42 13 13 16 10
3J3V_B 0.80 0.81 0.79 22 2628 12 2 4 6 5
3UZL_B 0.49 0.50 0.50 8 1277 15 0 8 7 8
3W1K_J 0.97 0.97 0.97 30 1647 1 1 0 0 1
3W3S_B 0.95 0.94 0.97 31 1957 2 0 1 1 2
3ZEX_D 0.91 0.89 0.94 31 2763 6 0 2 4 4
3ZEX_C 0.30 0.34 0.26 10 5336 43 5 23 15 19
3ZND_W 0.24 0.38 0.16 3 1172 25 9 7 9 5
4A1C_2 0.18 0.25 0.14 5 4481 43 13 17 13 15
4A1C_3 0.85 0.84 0.86 31 2727 8 0 5 3 6
4AOB_A 0.62 0.62 0.64 18 1409 11 4 6 1 11
4ENB_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 461 2 0 0 2 4
4ENC_A 0.36 0.33 0.42 5 484 7 0 7 0 10
4FRG_B 0.36 0.38 0.38 9 1178 15 2 13 0 15
4FRN_A 0.58 0.57 0.59 16 1821 11 3 8 0 12
4JF2_A 0.69 0.67 0.73 16 1060 6 4 2 0 8

^top


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