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 RNASampler(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric RNASampler(20) CMfinder(20)
MCC 0.721 > 0.652
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.731 ± 0.256 > 0.662 ± 0.224
Sensitivity 0.640 > 0.518
Positive Predictive Value 0.820 < 0.831
Total TP 73 > 59
Total TN 8148 < 8166
Total FP 20 > 16
Total FP CONTRA 4 > 3
Total FP INCONS 12 > 9
Total FP COMP 4 = 4
Total FN 41 < 55
P-value 0.0

^top




Performance plots


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

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

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

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

^top





Performance of RNASampler(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 73
Total TN 8148
Total FP 20
Total FP CONTRA 4
Total FP INCONS 12
Total FP COMP 4
Total FN 41
Total Scores
MCC 0.721
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.731 ± 0.256
Sensitivity 0.640
Positive Predictive Value 0.820
Nr of predictions 4

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
3J20_0 0.90 0.90 0.90 19 1198 3 1 1 1 2
3J2L_3 0.56 0.50 0.63 17 2993 12 3 7 2 17
3ZEX_D 0.83 0.69 1.00 24 2772 1 0 0 1 11
4FRG_B 0.64 0.54 0.76 13 1185 4 0 4 0 11

^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.