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 RNASLOpt - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric RNASLOpt Mastr(20)
MCC 0.480 > 0.467
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.514 ± 0.210 > 0.328 ± 0.275
Sensitivity 0.500 > 0.272
Positive Predictive Value 0.470 < 0.812
Total TP 103 > 56
Total TN 22968 < 23118
Total FP 171 > 15
Total FP CONTRA 50 > 5
Total FP INCONS 66 > 8
Total FP COMP 55 > 2
Total FN 103 < 150
P-value 1.53906836456e-05

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of RNASLOpt and Mastr(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 RNASLOpt and Mastr(20)).

  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 RNASLOpt and Mastr(20)).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for RNASLOpt and Mastr(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 RNASLOpt and Mastr(20)).

^top





Performance of RNASLOpt - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNASLOpt

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 103
Total TN 22968
Total FP 171
Total FP CONTRA 50
Total FP INCONS 66
Total FP COMP 55
Total FN 103
Total Scores
MCC 0.480
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.514 ± 0.210
Sensitivity 0.500
Positive Predictive Value 0.470
Nr of predictions 10

^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
3J20_0 0.74 0.76 0.73 16 1197 7 3 3 1 5
3J3D_C 0.90 0.95 0.86 18 947 3 3 0 0 1
3J3E_8 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 2724 30 6 12 12 15
3J3F_8 0.39 0.47 0.32 9 4733 38 10 9 19 10
3ZEX_C 0.32 0.34 0.31 10 5342 36 8 14 14 19
4A1C_2 0.30 0.40 0.24 8 4482 35 13 13 9 12
4AOB_A 0.31 0.28 0.38 8 1416 13 3 10 0 21
4ENB_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 461 0 0 0 0 4
4ENC_A 0.73 0.60 0.90 9 486 1 1 0 0 6
4FRG_B 0.60 0.58 0.64 14 1180 8 3 5 0 10

^top



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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 56
Total TN 23118
Total FP 15
Total FP CONTRA 5
Total FP INCONS 8
Total FP COMP 2
Total FN 150
Total Scores
MCC 0.467
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.328 ± 0.275
Sensitivity 0.272
Positive Predictive Value 0.812
Nr of predictions 10

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
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 3 3 0 0 1
3J3E_8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2742 0 0 0 0 15
3J3F_8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 4761 0 0 0 0 19
3ZEX_C 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 5374 0 0 0 0 29
4A1C_2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 4516 0 0 0 0 20
4AOB_A 0.42 0.34 0.53 10 1418 10 1 8 1 19
4ENB_A 0.44 0.20 1.00 3 469 0 0 0 0 12
4ENC_A 0.57 0.33 1.00 5 491 0 0 0 0 10
4FRG_B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1202 0 0 0 0 24

^top


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