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 RNASLOpt - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric RNAsubopt RNASLOpt
MCC 0.511 > 0.489
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.600 ± 0.099 > 0.580 ± 0.099
Sensitivity 0.452 > 0.393
Positive Predictive Value 0.582 < 0.614
Total TP 644 > 559
Total TN 280065 < 280261
Total FP 517 > 392
Total FP CONTRA 45 > 43
Total FP INCONS 418 > 309
Total FP COMP 54 > 40
Total FN 780 < 865
P-value 3.56938820447e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

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

  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 RNAsubopt and RNASLOpt).

  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 RNAsubopt and RNASLOpt).

  5. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for RNAsubopt and RNASLOpt. 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 RNASLOpt).

  6. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for RNAsubopt and RNASLOpt. 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 RNASLOpt).

^top





Performance of RNAsubopt - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNAsubopt

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 644
Total TN 280065
Total FP 517
Total FP CONTRA 45
Total FP INCONS 418
Total FP COMP 54
Total FN 780
Total Scores
MCC 0.511
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.600 ± 0.099
Sensitivity 0.452
Positive Predictive Value 0.582
Nr of predictions 47

^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
2LC8_A -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1525 15 2 13 0 20
2LDL_A - 0.90 0.82 1.00 9 342 1 0 0 1 2
2LHP_A - 0.97 0.94 1.00 15 651 0 0 0 0 1
2LI4_A - 0.93 0.88 1.00 14 482 0 0 0 0 2
2LJJ_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 8 343 2 0 0 2 0
2LK3_A - 0.95 0.90 1.00 9 267 0 0 0 0 1
2LKR_A - 0.81 0.77 0.86 30 6070 9 0 5 4 9
2LQZ_A - 0.85 0.82 0.90 9 341 1 1 0 0 2
2LWK_A - 0.83 0.77 0.91 10 485 1 0 1 0 3
3J0L_a - 0.35 0.31 0.42 5 1116 7 1 6 0 11
3J0L_g - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 460 5 1 4 0 4
3J0L_7 - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1213 12 0 12 0 17
3J0L_h - 0.75 0.60 0.93 26 6077 4 0 2 2 17
3J0L_8 - 0.93 0.88 1.00 7 183 0 0 0 0 1
3J0L_1 - 0.76 0.63 0.92 12 1212 2 0 1 1 7
3J0L_2 - 0.25 0.24 0.28 8 6187 25 0 21 4 25
3J16_L 0.41 0.37 0.48 11 2752 12 1 11 0 19
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
3J2C_M - 0.44 0.37 0.52 76 106346 72 8 61 3 131
3J2C_O - 0.56 0.49 0.65 31 10248 17 1 16 0 32
3J2L_3 0.61 0.53 0.72 28 7836 13 0 11 2 25
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 1 0 0 1 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
3U4M_B - 0.38 0.32 0.46 12 3134 14 0 14 0 25
3UZL_B 0.48 0.38 0.61 14 3547 9 0 9 0 23
3VJR_D - 0.96 0.92 1.00 12 618 0 0 0 0 1
3W3S_B 0.87 0.78 0.97 31 4721 2 0 1 1 9
3ZEX_F - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2617 11 2 9 0 12
3ZEX_G - 0.46 0.42 0.52 31 16411 32 3 26 3 43
3ZEX_E - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 21893 54 4 48 2 77
3ZEX_D 0.80 0.69 0.92 34 6984 3 0 3 0 15
3ZEX_H - 0.18 0.18 0.18 7 9006 32 6 26 0 31
3ZEX_C 0.24 0.21 0.28 11 14157 42 1 27 14 41
4A1C_3 0.70 0.59 0.82 32 7101 7 1 6 0 22
4A1C_2 0.14 0.15 0.13 5 11742 43 5 29 9 28
4A4U_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 222 0 0 0 0 0
4AOB_A 0.52 0.43 0.64 18 4343 11 2 8 1 24
4ATO_G - 0.30 0.30 0.33 3 519 6 2 4 0 7
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 0 7 0 14
4FNJ_A - 0.79 0.63 1.00 10 585 0 0 0 0 6
4FRG_B 0.32 0.28 0.38 9 3462 15 0 15 0 23
4FRN_A 0.51 0.44 0.59 16 5124 11 3 8 0 20
4HXH_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 6 319 0 0 0 0 0

^top



Performance of RNASLOpt - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNASLOpt

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 559
Total TN 280261
Total FP 392
Total FP CONTRA 43
Total FP INCONS 309
Total FP COMP 40
Total FN 865
Total Scores
MCC 0.489
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.580 ± 0.099
Sensitivity 0.393
Positive Predictive Value 0.614
Nr of predictions 47

^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
2LHP_A - 0.97 0.94 1.00 15 651 0 0 0 0 1
2LI4_A - 0.93 0.88 1.00 14 482 0 0 0 0 2
2LJJ_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 8 343 2 0 0 2 0
2LK3_A - 0.95 0.90 1.00 9 267 0 0 0 0 1
2LKR_A - 0.68 0.62 0.75 24 6073 9 0 8 1 15
2LQZ_A - 0.85 0.82 0.90 9 341 1 1 0 0 2
2LWK_A - 0.83 0.77 0.91 10 485 1 0 1 0 3
3J0L_a - 0.26 0.19 0.38 3 1120 5 1 4 0 13
3J0L_g - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 461 4 1 3 0 4
3J0L_7 - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1212 13 0 13 0 17
3J0L_h - 0.70 0.49 1.00 21 6084 0 0 0 0 22
3J0L_8 - 0.70 0.50 1.00 4 186 0 0 0 0 4
3J0L_1 - 0.65 0.47 0.90 9 1215 3 0 1 2 10
3J0L_2 - 0.39 0.36 0.43 12 6188 18 2 14 2 21
3J16_L 0.53 0.40 0.71 12 2758 5 0 5 0 18
3J20_1 0.96 0.91 1.00 21 2905 0 0 0 0 2
3J20_0 0.66 0.57 0.77 17 2828 6 1 4 1 13
3J2C_M - 0.38 0.29 0.50 60 106370 64 11 50 3 147
3J2C_O - 0.62 0.49 0.78 31 10256 10 0 9 1 32
3J2L_3 0.56 0.43 0.72 23 7843 11 0 9 2 30
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
3U4M_B - 0.38 0.32 0.46 12 3134 14 0 14 0 25
3UZL_B 0.48 0.32 0.71 12 3553 5 0 5 0 25
3VJR_D - 0.96 0.92 1.00 12 618 0 0 0 0 1
3W3S_B 0.82 0.70 0.97 28 4724 2 0 1 1 12
3ZEX_F - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2628 0 0 0 0 12
3ZEX_G - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 16471 0 0 0 0 74
3ZEX_E - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 21892 55 4 49 2 77
3ZEX_D 0.76 0.59 0.97 29 6991 1 0 1 0 20
3ZEX_H - 0.19 0.18 0.21 7 9012 26 4 22 0 31
3ZEX_C 0.26 0.21 0.33 11 14163 35 2 20 13 41
4A1C_3 0.67 0.52 0.88 28 7108 4 0 4 0 26
4A1C_2 0.23 0.24 0.22 8 11744 35 8 21 6 25
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
4FNJ_A - -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 584 11 0 11 0 16
4FRG_B 0.56 0.47 0.68 15 3464 7 1 6 0 17
4FRN_A 0.20 0.17 0.26 6 5128 17 2 15 0 30
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.