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 RDfolder - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

  5. Compile and download dataset for RNASLOpt & RDfolder [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric RNASLOpt RDfolder
MCC 0.610 > 0.491
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.655 ± 0.151 > 0.579 ± 0.175
Sensitivity 0.504 > 0.389
Positive Predictive Value 0.747 > 0.632
Total TP 171 > 132
Total TN 25750 < 25770
Total FP 66 < 80
Total FP CONTRA 8 > 6
Total FP INCONS 50 < 71
Total FP COMP 8 > 3
Total FN 168 < 207
P-value 5.06544643719e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of RNASLOpt and RDfolder. 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 RDfolder).

  2. Comparison of performance of RNASLOpt and RDfolder. 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 RDfolder).

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

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

^top





Performance of RNASLOpt - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNASLOpt

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 171
Total TN 25750
Total FP 66
Total FP CONTRA 8
Total FP INCONS 50
Total FP COMP 8
Total FN 168
Total Scores
MCC 0.610
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.655 ± 0.151
Sensitivity 0.504
Positive Predictive Value 0.747
Nr of predictions 21

^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
2LC8_A 0.47 0.35 0.64 7 1529 4 0 4 0 13
2LDL_A - 0.90 0.82 1.00 9 342 1 0 0 1 2
2LK3_A - 0.95 0.90 1.00 9 267 0 0 0 0 1
3J0L_7 - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1212 13 0 13 0 17
3J0L_g - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 461 4 1 3 0 4
3J0L_8 - 0.70 0.50 1.00 4 186 0 0 0 0 4
3J0L_a - 0.26 0.19 0.38 3 1120 5 1 4 0 13
3J0L_1 - 0.65 0.47 0.90 9 1215 3 0 1 2 10
3J16_L 0.53 0.40 0.71 12 2758 5 0 5 0 18
3J20_0 0.66 0.57 0.77 17 2828 6 1 4 1 13
3SN2_B 0.96 0.92 1.00 11 395 0 0 0 0 1
3TRZ_Z - 0.91 0.83 1.00 5 205 2 0 0 2 1
3TS0_U - 1.00 1.00 1.00 6 247 1 0 0 1 0
3TS2_V - 1.00 1.00 1.00 5 271 0 0 0 0 0
3W3S_B 0.82 0.70 0.97 28 4724 2 0 1 1 12
4A4U_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 222 0 0 0 0 0
4AOB_A 0.26 0.19 0.38 8 4350 13 2 11 0 34
4ATO_G - 0.30 0.30 0.33 3 519 6 2 4 0 7
4ENB_A 0.76 0.58 1.00 11 1264 0 0 0 0 8
4ENC_A 0.65 0.47 0.90 9 1316 1 1 0 0 10
4HXH_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 6 319 0 0 0 0 0

^top



Performance of RDfolder - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RDfolder

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 132
Total TN 25770
Total FP 80
Total FP CONTRA 6
Total FP INCONS 71
Total FP COMP 3
Total FN 207
Total Scores
MCC 0.491
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.579 ± 0.175
Sensitivity 0.389
Positive Predictive Value 0.632
Nr of predictions 21

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1526 14 2 12 0 20
2LDL_A - 0.90 0.82 1.00 9 342 0 0 0 0 2
2LK3_A - 0.95 0.90 1.00 9 267 0 0 0 0 1
3J0L_7 - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1220 5 0 5 0 17
3J0L_g - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 462 3 1 2 0 4
3J0L_8 - 0.86 0.75 1.00 6 184 0 0 0 0 2
3J0L_a - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1124 4 1 3 0 16
3J0L_1 - 0.65 0.47 0.90 9 1215 2 0 1 1 10
3J16_L 0.22 0.17 0.31 5 2759 11 0 11 0 25
3J20_0 0.73 0.57 0.94 17 2832 2 0 1 1 13
3SN2_B 0.96 0.92 1.00 11 395 0 0 0 0 1
3TRZ_Z - 0.91 0.83 1.00 5 205 0 0 0 0 1
3TS0_U - 0.91 0.83 1.00 5 248 0 0 0 0 1
3TS2_V - 1.00 1.00 1.00 5 271 0 0 0 0 0
3W3S_B 0.27 0.23 0.33 9 4726 18 1 17 0 31
4A4U_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 222 0 0 0 0 0
4AOB_A 0.35 0.26 0.48 11 4348 13 1 11 1 31
4ATO_G - 0.63 0.40 1.00 4 524 0 0 0 0 6
4ENB_A 0.43 0.32 0.60 6 1265 4 0 4 0 13
4ENC_A 0.43 0.32 0.60 6 1316 4 0 4 0 13
4HXH_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 6 319 0 0 0 0 0

^top


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