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 RNAfold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

  4. Performance of Mastr(seed) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric RNAfold Mastr(seed)
MCC 0.590 > 0.236
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.635 ± 0.069 > 0.108 ± 0.078
Sensitivity 0.531 > 0.062
Positive Predictive Value 0.660 < 0.900
Total TP 1000 > 117
Total TN 351438 < 352824
Total FP 618 > 15
Total FP CONTRA 75 > 0
Total FP INCONS 441 > 13
Total FP COMP 102 > 2
Total FN 885 < 1768
P-value 3.56938820447e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of RNAfold and Mastr(seed). 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 RNAfold and Mastr(seed)).

  2. Comparison of performance of RNAfold and Mastr(seed). 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 RNAfold and Mastr(seed)).

  3. 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 RNAfold and Mastr(seed)).

  4. 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 RNAfold and Mastr(seed)).

  5. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for RNAfold and Mastr(seed). 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 RNAfold and Mastr(seed)).

  6. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for RNAfold and Mastr(seed). 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 RNAfold and Mastr(seed)).

^top





Performance of RNAfold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNAfold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 1000
Total TN 351438
Total FP 618
Total FP CONTRA 75
Total FP INCONS 441
Total FP COMP 102
Total FN 885
Total Scores
MCC 0.590
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.635 ± 0.069
Sensitivity 0.531
Positive Predictive Value 0.660
Nr of predictions 53

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KDQ_B 0.95 0.91 1.00 10 396 0 0 0 0 1
2KE6_A 0.97 0.95 1.00 18 1110 1 0 0 1 1
2KUR_A 0.95 0.90 1.00 19 1109 0 0 0 0 2
2KUU_A 0.92 0.86 1.00 18 1110 1 0 0 1 3
2KUV_A 0.93 0.86 1.00 19 1109 0 0 0 0 3
2KUW_A 0.95 0.90 1.00 19 1109 0 0 0 0 2
2KX8_A 0.94 0.89 1.00 16 845 0 0 0 0 2
2L1F_B 0.98 0.96 1.00 24 2121 0 0 0 0 1
2L1F_A 0.98 0.96 1.00 23 2057 0 0 0 0 1
2L94_A 0.97 0.95 1.00 19 971 0 0 0 0 1
2LC8_A 0.61 0.55 0.69 11 1524 5 0 5 0 9
2WRQ_Y 0.57 0.59 0.56 10 2832 13 5 3 5 7
2WWQ_V 0.76 0.68 0.86 19 2904 5 0 3 2 9
2XKV_B 0.51 0.50 0.53 10 4541 23 0 9 14 10
2XQD_Y 0.88 0.78 1.00 21 2829 0 0 0 0 6
2XXA_G 0.34 0.31 0.39 13 5118 20 1 19 0 29
2ZZM_B 0.21 0.19 0.25 6 3462 18 0 18 0 26
2ZZN_D 0.82 0.78 0.88 21 2461 3 0 3 0 6
3A2K_C 0.42 0.39 0.46 11 2902 13 2 11 0 17
3A3A_A 0.87 0.76 1.00 28 3627 0 0 0 0 9
3AKZ_H 0.43 0.39 0.48 11 2678 12 2 10 0 17
3AMU_B 0.70 0.59 0.84 16 2984 5 0 3 2 11
3G4S_9 0.51 0.39 0.69 22 7349 10 1 9 0 35
3GX2_A 0.68 0.55 0.85 22 4345 5 0 4 1 18
3IVN_B 0.78 0.61 1.00 19 2327 0 0 0 0 12
3IYQ_A 0.31 0.34 0.29 32 60616 80 24 54 2 62
3IZ4_A 0.51 0.47 0.55 62 70763 52 10 41 1 70
3IZF_C 0.59 0.52 0.67 28 6861 14 1 13 0 26
3J16_L 0.75 0.57 1.00 17 2758 0 0 0 0 13
3J20_1 0.96 0.91 1.00 21 2905 2 0 0 2 2
3J20_0 0.43 0.40 0.48 12 2825 14 0 13 1 18
3J2L_3 0.62 0.53 0.74 28 7837 12 0 10 2 25
3JYV_7 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 2828 22 1 21 0 32
3JYX_3 0.62 0.63 0.61 17 6300 22 1 10 11 10
3JYX_4 0.31 0.30 0.32 10 12215 33 5 16 12 23
3LA5_A 0.78 0.62 1.00 21 2464 0 0 0 0 13
3NPB_A 0.83 0.72 0.97 33 6987 4 0 1 3 13
3O58_3 0.34 0.34 0.34 12 12368 34 2 21 11 23
3O58_2 0.59 0.61 0.58 23 7220 19 4 13 2 15
3PDR_A 0.75 0.63 0.90 45 12830 7 1 4 2 27
3RKF_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2191 0 0 0 0 14
3SD1_A 0.64 0.52 0.79 22 3888 6 1 5 0 20
3UZL_B 0.48 0.38 0.61 14 3547 9 0 9 0 23
3W3S_B 0.55 0.50 0.61 20 4720 14 1 12 1 20
3ZEX_C 0.24 0.21 0.28 11 14157 42 1 27 14 41
3ZEX_D 0.77 0.65 0.91 32 6986 3 0 3 0 17
4A1C_3 0.70 0.59 0.82 32 7101 7 1 6 0 22
4A1C_2 0.14 0.15 0.14 5 11744 43 5 27 11 28
4AOB_A 0.50 0.40 0.63 17 4344 11 2 8 1 25
4ENB_A 0.70 0.58 0.85 11 1262 2 1 1 0 8
4ENC_A 0.32 0.26 0.42 5 1314 7 1 6 0 14
4FRG_B 0.32 0.28 0.38 9 3462 15 0 15 0 23
4FRN_A 0.52 0.44 0.62 16 5125 10 2 8 0 20

^top



Performance of Mastr(seed) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 117
Total TN 352824
Total FP 15
Total FP CONTRA 0
Total FP INCONS 13
Total FP COMP 2
Total FN 1768
Total Scores
MCC 0.236
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.108 ± 0.078
Sensitivity 0.062
Positive Predictive Value 0.900
Nr of predictions 53

^top



2. Individual counts for Mastr(seed) [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KDQ_B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 406 0 0 0 0 11
2KE6_A 0.92 0.84 1.00 16 1112 1 0 0 1 3
2KUR_A 0.79 0.71 0.88 15 1111 2 0 2 0 6
2KUU_A 0.76 0.67 0.88 14 1112 3 0 2 1 7
2KUV_A 0.77 0.68 0.88 15 1111 2 0 2 0 7
2KUW_A 0.52 0.48 0.59 10 1111 7 0 7 0 11
2KX8_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 861 0 0 0 0 18
2L1F_B 0.98 0.96 1.00 24 2121 0 0 0 0 1
2L1F_A 0.98 0.96 1.00 23 2057 0 0 0 0 1
2L94_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 990 0 0 0 0 20
2LC8_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1540 0 0 0 0 20
2WRQ_Y 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2850 0 0 0 0 17
2WWQ_V 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2926 0 0 0 0 28
2XKV_B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 4560 0 0 0 0 20
2XQD_Y 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2850 0 0 0 0 27
2XXA_G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 5151 0 0 0 0 42
2ZZM_B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 3486 0 0 0 0 32
2ZZN_D 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2485 0 0 0 0 27
3A2K_C 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2926 0 0 0 0 28
3A3A_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 3655 0 0 0 0 37
3AKZ_H 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2701 0 0 0 0 28
3AMU_B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 3003 0 0 0 0 27
3G4S_9 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 7381 0 0 0 0 57
3GX2_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 4371 0 0 0 0 40
3IVN_B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2346 0 0 0 0 31
3IYQ_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 60726 0 0 0 0 94
3IZ4_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 70876 0 0 0 0 132
3IZF_C 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 6903 0 0 0 0 54
3J16_L 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2775 0 0 0 0 30
3J20_1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2926 0 0 0 0 23
3J20_0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2850 0 0 0 0 30
3J2L_3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 7875 0 0 0 0 53
3JYV_7 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2850 0 0 0 0 32
3JYX_3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 6328 0 0 0 0 27
3JYX_4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 12246 0 0 0 0 33
3LA5_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2485 0 0 0 0 34
3NPB_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 7021 0 0 0 0 46
3O58_3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 12403 0 0 0 0 35
3O58_2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 7260 0 0 0 0 38
3PDR_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 12880 0 0 0 0 72
3RKF_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2211 0 0 0 0 34
3SD1_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 3916 0 0 0 0 42
3UZL_B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 3570 0 0 0 0 37
3W3S_B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 4753 0 0 0 0 40
3ZEX_C 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 14196 0 0 0 0 52
3ZEX_D 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 7021 0 0 0 0 49
4A1C_3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 7140 0 0 0 0 54
4A1C_2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 11781 0 0 0 0 33
4AOB_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 4371 0 0 0 0 42
4ENB_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1275 0 0 0 0 19
4ENC_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1326 0 0 0 0 19
4FRG_B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 3486 0 0 0 0 32
4FRN_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 5151 0 0 0 0 36

^top


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