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(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

  4. Performance of NanoFolder - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric RNASampler(seed) NanoFolder
MCC 0.361 > 0.195
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.324 ± 0.792 > 0.236 ± 0.685
Sensitivity 0.282 > 0.254
Positive Predictive Value 0.476 > 0.165
Total TP 20 > 18
Total TN 6991 > 6924
Total FP 31 < 106
Total FP CONTRA 4 < 21
Total FP INCONS 18 < 70
Total FP COMP 9 < 15
Total FN 51 < 53
P-value 0.0

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of RNASampler(seed) and NanoFolder. 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(seed) and NanoFolder).

  2. Comparison of performance of RNASampler(seed) and NanoFolder. 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(seed) and NanoFolder).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for RNASampler(seed) and NanoFolder. 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(seed) and NanoFolder).

  4. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for RNASampler(seed) and NanoFolder. 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(seed) and NanoFolder).

^top





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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 20
Total TN 6991
Total FP 31
Total FP CONTRA 4
Total FP INCONS 18
Total FP COMP 9
Total FN 51
Total Scores
MCC 0.361
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.324 ± 0.792
Sensitivity 0.282
Positive Predictive Value 0.476
Nr of predictions 3

^top



2. Individual counts for RNASampler(seed) [ 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 0 518 10 0 10 0 18
3W3S_B 0.60 0.36 1.00 12 1977 1 0 0 1 21
4A1C_2 0.40 0.40 0.40 8 4496 20 4 8 8 12

^top



Performance of NanoFolder - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for NanoFolder

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 18
Total TN 6924
Total FP 106
Total FP CONTRA 21
Total FP INCONS 70
Total FP COMP 15
Total FN 53
Total Scores
MCC 0.195
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.236 ± 0.685
Sensitivity 0.254
Positive Predictive Value 0.165
Nr of predictions 3

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.54 0.61 0.50 11 506 11 1 10 0 7
3W3S_B 0.18 0.21 0.18 7 1949 34 2 31 1 26
4A1C_2 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 4469 61 18 29 14 20

^top


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