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 RNASLOpt - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

  4. Performance of CMfinder(20) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

  5. Compile and download dataset for RNASLOpt & CMfinder(20) [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric RNASLOpt CMfinder(20)
MCC 0.733 > 0.652
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.727 ± 0.170 > 0.662 ± 0.224
Sensitivity 0.693 > 0.518
Positive Predictive Value 0.782 < 0.831
Total TP 79 > 59
Total TN 8136 < 8166
Total FP 30 > 16
Total FP CONTRA 6 > 3
Total FP INCONS 16 > 9
Total FP COMP 8 > 4
Total FN 35 < 55
P-value 0.0

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of RNASLOpt and CMfinder(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 RNASLOpt and CMfinder(20)).

  2. Comparison of performance of RNASLOpt and CMfinder(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 RNASLOpt and CMfinder(20)).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for RNASLOpt and CMfinder(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 RNASLOpt and CMfinder(20)).

  4. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for RNASLOpt and CMfinder(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 RNASLOpt and CMfinder(20)).

^top





Performance of RNASLOpt - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNASLOpt

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 79
Total TN 8136
Total FP 30
Total FP CONTRA 6
Total FP INCONS 16
Total FP COMP 8
Total FN 35
Total Scores
MCC 0.733
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.727 ± 0.170
Sensitivity 0.693
Positive Predictive Value 0.782
Nr of predictions 4

^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
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
3ZEX_D 0.86 0.74 1.00 26 2770 4 0 0 4 9
4FRG_B 0.60 0.58 0.64 14 1180 8 3 5 0 10

^top



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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 59
Total TN 8166
Total FP 16
Total FP CONTRA 3
Total FP INCONS 9
Total FP COMP 4
Total FN 55
Total Scores
MCC 0.652
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.662 ± 0.224
Sensitivity 0.518
Positive Predictive Value 0.831
Nr of predictions 4

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
3J20_0 0.84 0.76 0.94 16 1202 2 1 0 1 5
3J2L_3 0.57 0.50 0.65 17 2994 11 2 7 2 17
3ZEX_D 0.70 0.54 0.90 19 2775 3 0 2 1 16
4FRG_B 0.54 0.29 1.00 7 1195 0 0 0 0 17

^top


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