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 0.318 > 0.169
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.282 ± 0.692 > 0.227 ± 0.660
Sensitivity 0.215 > 0.194
Positive Predictive Value 0.476 > 0.157
Total TP 20 > 18
Total TN 18032 > 17959
Total FP 31 < 106
Total FP CONTRA 0 < 13
Total FP INCONS 22 < 84
Total FP COMP 9 = 9
Total FN 73 < 75
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 18032
Total FP 31
Total FP CONTRA 0
Total FP INCONS 22
Total FP COMP 9
Total FN 73
Total Scores
MCC 0.318
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.282 ± 0.692
Sensitivity 0.215
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 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1530 10 0 10 0 20
3W3S_B 0.55 0.30 1.00 12 4741 1 0 0 1 28
4A1C_2 0.31 0.24 0.40 8 11761 20 0 12 8 25

^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 17959
Total FP 106
Total FP CONTRA 13
Total FP INCONS 84
Total FP COMP 9
Total FN 75
Total Scores
MCC 0.169
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.227 ± 0.660
Sensitivity 0.194
Positive Predictive Value 0.157
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 0.52 0.55 0.50 11 1518 11 0 11 0 9
3W3S_B 0.17 0.18 0.18 7 4713 34 1 32 1 33
4A1C_2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 11728 61 12 41 8 33

^top


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