Table of contents:
- Overview
- Performance Plots
- Performance of PETfold_pre2.0(20)
- scored higher in this pairwise comparison
- Performance of HotKnots
- scored lower in this pairwise comparison
- Compile and download dataset for PETfold_pre2.0(20) & HotKnots [.zip] - may take several seconds...
Overview
| Metric |
PETfold_pre2.0(20) |
|
HotKnots |
|---|
| MCC |
0.649 |
>
|
0.474 |
| Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals |
0.630
±
0.114
|
>
|
0.485
±
0.137
|
| Sensitivity |
0.530 |
>
|
0.425 |
| Positive Predictive Value |
0.798 |
>
|
0.535 |
| Total TP |
364 |
>
|
292 |
| Total TN |
110739 |
>
|
110649 |
| Total FP |
120 |
<
|
296 |
| Total FP CONTRA |
4 |
<
|
25 |
| Total FP INCONS |
88 |
<
|
229 |
| Total FP COMP |
28 |
<
|
42 |
| Total FN |
323 |
<
|
395 |
| P-value |
2.36983135185e-08 |
Performance plots
-
Comparison of performance of PETfold_pre2.0(20) and HotKnots. 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(20)
and HotKnots).
-
Comparison of performance of PETfold_pre2.0(20) and HotKnots. 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(20)
and HotKnots).
-
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(20)
and HotKnots).
-
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(20)
and HotKnots).
-
Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for PETfold_pre2.0(20) and HotKnots. 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(20)
and HotKnots).
-
Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for PETfold_pre2.0(20) and HotKnots. 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(20)
and HotKnots).
Performance of PETfold_pre2.0(20)
- scored higher in this pairwise comparison
1. Total counts & total scores for PETfold_pre2.0(20)
| Total Base Pair Counts |
|---|
| Total TP |
364 |
| Total TN |
110739 |
| Total FP |
120 |
| Total FP CONTRA |
4 |
| Total FP INCONS |
88 |
| Total FP COMP |
28 |
| Total FN |
323 |
| Total Scores |
|---|
| MCC |
0.649 |
| Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals |
0.630
±
0.114
|
| Sensitivity |
0.530 |
| Positive Predictive Value |
0.798 |
| Nr of predictions |
18 |
Performance of HotKnots
- scored lower in this pairwise comparison
1. Total counts & total scores for HotKnots
| Total Base Pair Counts |
|---|
| Total TP |
292 |
| Total TN |
110649 |
| Total FP |
296 |
| Total FP CONTRA |
25 |
| Total FP INCONS |
229 |
| Total FP COMP |
42 |
| Total FN |
395 |
| Total Scores |
|---|
| MCC |
0.474 |
| Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals |
0.485
±
0.137
|
| Sensitivity |
0.425 |
| Positive Predictive Value |
0.535 |
| Nr of predictions |
18 |
Matthews Correlation Coeffient, Sensitivity and Positive Predictive Value have been calculated based
on the paper by Gardener & Giegerich, 2004.
| 
