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 RNAsubopt - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

  4. Performance of CMfinder(20) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

  5. Compile and download dataset for RNAsubopt & CMfinder(20) [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric RNAsubopt CMfinder(20)
MCC 0.577 > 0.546
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.541 ± 0.334 < 0.560 ± 0.222
Sensitivity 0.506 > 0.366
Positive Predictive Value 0.664 < 0.822
Total TP 83 > 60
Total TN 21107 < 21159
Total FP 45 > 15
Total FP CONTRA 0 < 1
Total FP INCONS 42 > 12
Total FP COMP 3 > 2
Total FN 81 < 104
P-value 0.0

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of RNAsubopt and CMfinder(20). 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 RNAsubopt and CMfinder(20)).

  2. Comparison of performance of RNAsubopt and CMfinder(20). 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 RNAsubopt and CMfinder(20)).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for RNAsubopt and CMfinder(20). 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 RNAsubopt and CMfinder(20)).

  4. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for RNAsubopt and CMfinder(20). 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 RNAsubopt and CMfinder(20)).

^top





Performance of RNAsubopt - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNAsubopt

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 83
Total TN 21107
Total FP 45
Total FP CONTRA 0
Total FP INCONS 42
Total FP COMP 3
Total FN 81
Total Scores
MCC 0.577
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.541 ± 0.334
Sensitivity 0.506
Positive Predictive Value 0.664
Nr of predictions 4

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
3J20_0 0.43 0.40 0.48 12 2825 14 0 13 1 18
3J2L_3 0.61 0.53 0.72 28 7836 13 0 11 2 25
3ZEX_D 0.80 0.69 0.92 34 6984 3 0 3 0 15
4FRG_B 0.32 0.28 0.38 9 3462 15 0 15 0 23

^top



Performance of CMfinder(20) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for CMfinder(20)

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 60
Total TN 21159
Total FP 15
Total FP CONTRA 1
Total FP INCONS 12
Total FP COMP 2
Total FN 104
Total Scores
MCC 0.546
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.560 ± 0.222
Sensitivity 0.366
Positive Predictive Value 0.822
Nr of predictions 4

^top



2. Individual counts for CMfinder(20) [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
3J20_0 0.75 0.57 1.00 17 2833 1 0 0 1 13
3J2L_3 0.45 0.32 0.63 17 7848 11 1 9 1 36
3ZEX_D 0.58 0.39 0.86 19 6999 3 0 3 0 30
4FRG_B 0.47 0.22 1.00 7 3479 0 0 0 0 25

^top


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