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 PETfold_pre2.0(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

  4. Performance of Vsfold5 - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

  5. Compile and download dataset for PETfold_pre2.0(seed) & Vsfold5 [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric PETfold_pre2.0(seed) Vsfold5
MCC 0.790 > 0.524
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.767 ± 0.089 > 0.528 ± 0.219
Sensitivity 0.732 > 0.550
Positive Predictive Value 0.858 > 0.510
Total TP 205 > 154
Total TN 23021 > 22958
Total FP 71 < 190
Total FP CONTRA 14 < 50
Total FP INCONS 20 < 98
Total FP COMP 37 < 42
Total FN 75 < 126
P-value 2.71568867205e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of PETfold_pre2.0(seed) and Vsfold5. 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 PETfold_pre2.0(seed) and Vsfold5).

  2. 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 PETfold_pre2.0(seed) and Vsfold5).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for PETfold_pre2.0(seed) and Vsfold5. 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 PETfold_pre2.0(seed) and Vsfold5).

^top





Performance of PETfold_pre2.0(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for PETfold_pre2.0(seed)

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 205
Total TN 23021
Total FP 71
Total FP CONTRA 14
Total FP INCONS 20
Total FP COMP 37
Total FN 75
Total Scores
MCC 0.790
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.767 ± 0.089
Sensitivity 0.732
Positive Predictive Value 0.858
Nr of predictions 13

^top



2. Individual counts for PETfold_pre2.0(seed) [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.41 0.33 0.55 6 517 5 0 5 0 12
3J20_0 0.95 0.95 0.95 20 1198 2 1 0 1 1
3J3D_C 0.90 0.95 0.86 18 947 4 3 0 1 1
3J3E_8 0.71 0.67 0.77 10 2729 8 1 2 5 5
3J3F_8 0.86 0.84 0.89 16 4743 13 2 0 11 3
3W3S_B 0.80 0.73 0.89 24 1962 6 1 2 3 9
4A1C_2 0.79 0.75 0.83 15 4498 12 1 2 9 5
4AOB_A 0.85 0.79 0.92 23 1412 4 0 2 2 6
4ENB_A 0.61 0.53 0.73 8 461 5 1 2 2 7
4ENC_A 0.61 0.53 0.73 8 485 5 1 2 2 7
4FRG_B 0.87 0.83 0.91 20 1180 3 0 2 1 4
4FRN_A 0.83 0.79 0.88 22 1823 3 2 1 0 6
4JF2_A 0.76 0.63 0.94 15 1066 1 1 0 0 9

^top



Performance of Vsfold5 - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Vsfold5

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 154
Total TN 22958
Total FP 190
Total FP CONTRA 50
Total FP INCONS 98
Total FP COMP 42
Total FN 126
Total Scores
MCC 0.524
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.528 ± 0.219
Sensitivity 0.550
Positive Predictive Value 0.510
Nr of predictions 13

^top



2. Individual counts for Vsfold5 [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A -0.03 0.00 0.00 0 515 13 0 13 0 18
3J20_0 0.76 0.76 0.76 16 1198 6 3 2 1 5
3J3D_C 0.63 0.68 0.59 13 946 9 3 6 0 6
3J3E_8 0.10 0.13 0.08 2 2718 31 10 12 9 13
3J3F_8 0.36 0.47 0.27 9 4728 38 13 11 14 10
3W3S_B 0.83 0.85 0.82 28 1955 7 2 4 1 5
4A1C_2 0.33 0.40 0.28 8 4487 37 8 13 16 12
4AOB_A 0.21 0.21 0.25 6 1413 19 2 16 1 23
4ENB_A 1.00 1.00 1.00 15 457 0 0 0 0 0
4ENC_A 0.97 1.00 0.94 15 480 1 1 0 0 0
4FRG_B 0.60 0.58 0.64 14 1180 8 3 5 0 10
4FRN_A 0.15 0.14 0.17 4 1825 19 3 16 0 24
4JF2_A 0.96 1.00 0.92 24 1056 2 2 0 0 0

^top


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