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 RNAalifold(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

  4. Performance of RNASampler(seed) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

  5. Compile and download dataset for RNAalifold(seed) & RNASampler(seed) [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric RNAalifold(seed) RNASampler(seed)
MCC 0.594 > 0.563
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.537 ± 0.174 < 0.542 ± 0.178
Sensitivity 0.423 < 0.472
Positive Predictive Value 0.840 > 0.678
Total TP 121 < 135
Total TN 30414 > 30359
Total FP 32 < 99
Total FP CONTRA 6 < 21
Total FP INCONS 17 < 43
Total FP COMP 9 < 35
Total FN 165 > 151
P-value 1.82627677697e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of RNAalifold(seed) and RNASampler(seed). 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 RNAalifold(seed) and RNASampler(seed)).

  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 RNAalifold(seed) and RNASampler(seed)).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for RNAalifold(seed) and RNASampler(seed). 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 RNAalifold(seed) and RNASampler(seed)).

^top





Performance of RNAalifold(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNAalifold(seed)

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 121
Total TN 30414
Total FP 32
Total FP CONTRA 6
Total FP INCONS 17
Total FP COMP 9
Total FN 165
Total Scores
MCC 0.594
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.537 ± 0.174
Sensitivity 0.423
Positive Predictive Value 0.840
Nr of predictions 12

^top



2. Individual counts for RNAalifold(seed) [ 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 0 516 12 0 12 0 18
3A3A_A 0.79 0.63 1.00 19 1481 0 0 0 0 11
3IVN_B 0.71 0.65 0.79 15 884 4 2 2 0 8
3J3E_8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2742 0 0 0 0 15
3J3F_8 0.61 0.37 1.00 7 4754 2 0 0 2 12
3O58_3 0.60 0.36 1.00 8 4756 1 0 0 1 14
3RKF_A 0.74 0.67 0.84 16 847 3 1 2 0 8
3SD1_A 0.70 0.59 0.85 17 1513 3 2 1 0 12
3W3S_B 0.71 0.52 1.00 17 1972 2 0 0 2 16
3ZEX_C 0.49 0.24 1.00 7 5367 2 0 0 2 22
4A1C_2 0.50 0.25 1.00 5 4511 2 0 0 2 15
4JF2_A 0.61 0.42 0.91 10 1071 1 1 0 0 14

^top



Performance of RNASampler(seed) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNASampler(seed)

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 135
Total TN 30359
Total FP 99
Total FP CONTRA 21
Total FP INCONS 43
Total FP COMP 35
Total FN 151
Total Scores
MCC 0.563
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.542 ± 0.178
Sensitivity 0.472
Positive Predictive Value 0.678
Nr of predictions 12

^top



2. Individual counts for RNASampler(seed) [ 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 0 518 10 0 10 0 18
3A3A_A 0.77 0.60 1.00 18 1482 0 0 0 0 12
3IVN_B 0.91 0.83 1.00 19 884 0 0 0 0 4
3J3E_8 0.18 0.20 0.18 3 2725 22 5 9 8 12
3J3F_8 0.47 0.47 0.47 9 4742 18 5 5 8 10
3O58_3 0.54 0.50 0.58 11 4745 13 5 3 5 11
3RKF_A 0.91 0.83 1.00 20 846 0 0 0 0 4
3SD1_A 0.72 0.55 0.94 16 1516 1 0 1 0 13
3W3S_B 0.60 0.36 1.00 12 1977 1 0 0 1 21
3ZEX_C 0.39 0.31 0.50 9 5356 14 2 7 5 20
4A1C_2 0.40 0.40 0.40 8 4496 20 4 8 8 12
4JF2_A 0.64 0.42 1.00 10 1072 0 0 0 0 14

^top


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