CompaRNA - on-line benchmarks of RNA structure prediction methods

FAQ

Metric	ContextFold		Vsfold4
MCC	0.625	>	0.501
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals	0.582 ± 0.177	>	0.471 ± 0.147
Sensitivity	0.601	>	0.495
Positive Predictive Value	0.659	>	0.520
Total TP	193	>	159
Total TN	24192	>	24179
Total FP	140	<	186
Total FP CONTRA	39	<	48
Total FP INCONS	61	<	99
Total FP COMP	40	>	39
Total FN	128	<	162
P-value	2.8150742666e-08

Comparison of performance of ContextFold and Vsfold4. 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 ContextFold and Vsfold4).
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 ContextFold and Vsfold4).
Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for ContextFold and Vsfold4. 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 ContextFold and Vsfold4).

Total Scores
MCC	0.625
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals	0.582 ± 0.177
Sensitivity	0.601
Positive Predictive Value	0.659
Nr of predictions	17

RNA Chain	Rfam family	MCC	SENS	PPV	TP	TN	FP	FP CONTRA	FP INCONS	FP COMP	FN
2LC8_A	GP_knot1 links to Rfam database...	0.58	0.56	0.63	10	512	6	0	6	0	8
2M58_A	-	-0.02	0.00	0.00	0	530	14	3	11	0	12
3J0L_a	-	0.80	0.73	0.89	8	402	2	0	1	1	3
3J20_0	tRNA links to Rfam database...	0.95	0.95	0.95	20	1198	2	1	0	1	1
3J3D_C	tRNA links to Rfam database...	0.79	0.79	0.79	15	949	4	3	1	0	4
3J3E_8	5_8S_rRNA links to Rfam database...	-0.01	0.00	0.00	0	2722	29	12	8	9	15
3J3F_8	5_8S_rRNA links to Rfam database...	0.36	0.42	0.31	8	4735	32	9	9	14	11
3U4M_B	-	0.98	0.95	1.00	21	1255	0	0	0	0	1
3W3S_B	tRNA-Sec links to Rfam database...	0.87	0.85	0.90	28	1958	4	0	3	1	5
4A1C_2	5_8S_rRNA links to Rfam database...	0.26	0.25	0.28	5	4498	26	3	10	13	15
4AOB_A	SAM links to Rfam database...	0.62	0.59	0.68	17	1412	9	2	6	1	12
4ATO_G	-	-0.02	0.00	0.00	0	218	2	1	1	0	7
4ENB_A	crcB links to Rfam database...	0.77	0.60	1.00	9	463	0	0	0	0	6
4ENC_A	crcB links to Rfam database...	0.73	0.60	0.90	9	486	1	1	0	0	6
4FRG_B	AdoCbl-variant links to Rfam database...	0.77	0.71	0.85	17	1182	3	2	1	0	7
4JF2_A	preQ1-II links to Rfam database...	0.57	0.50	0.67	12	1064	6	2	4	0	12
4JRC_A	-	0.91	0.82	1.00	14	608	0	0	0	0	3

Total Scores
MCC	0.501
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals	0.471 ± 0.147
Sensitivity	0.495
Positive Predictive Value	0.520
Nr of predictions	17

RNA Chain	Rfam family	MCC	SENS	PPV	TP	TN	FP	FP CONTRA	FP INCONS	FP COMP	FN
2LC8_A	GP_knot1 links to Rfam database...	-0.03	0.00	0.00	0	515	13	0	13	0	18
2M58_A	-	-0.02	0.00	0.00	0	538	6	0	6	0	12
3J0L_a	-	0.39	0.36	0.44	4	402	6	4	1	1	7
3J20_0	tRNA links to Rfam database...	0.95	0.95	0.95	20	1198	2	1	0	1	1
3J3D_C	tRNA links to Rfam database...	0.48	0.53	0.45	10	946	12	4	8	0	9
3J3E_8	5_8S_rRNA links to Rfam database...	0.10	0.13	0.09	2	2720	32	9	11	12	13
3J3F_8	5_8S_rRNA links to Rfam database...	0.35	0.42	0.30	8	4734	30	11	8	11	11
3U4M_B	-	0.49	0.55	0.46	12	1250	14	3	11	0	10
3W3S_B	tRNA-Sec links to Rfam database...	0.74	0.70	0.79	23	1960	7	1	5	1	10
4A1C_2	5_8S_rRNA links to Rfam database...	0.36	0.40	0.33	8	4492	28	4	12	12	12
4AOB_A	SAM links to Rfam database...	0.50	0.48	0.54	14	1411	13	3	9	1	15
4ATO_G	-	0.38	0.43	0.38	3	212	5	5	0	0	4
4ENB_A	crcB links to Rfam database...	0.85	0.73	1.00	11	461	0	0	0	0	4
4ENC_A	crcB links to Rfam database...	0.77	0.60	1.00	9	487	0	0	0	0	6
4FRG_B	AdoCbl-variant links to Rfam database...	0.60	0.58	0.64	14	1180	8	3	5	0	10
4JF2_A	preQ1-II links to Rfam database...	0.74	0.67	0.84	16	1063	3	0	3	0	8
4JRC_A	-	0.34	0.29	0.42	5	610	7	0	7	0	12

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