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 RNAwolf - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric RNAsubopt RNAwolf
MCC 0.540 > 0.449
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.517 ± 0.117 > 0.438 ± 0.133
Sensitivity 0.571 > 0.461
Positive Predictive Value 0.522 > 0.451
Total TP 264 > 213
Total TN 35278 < 35312
Total FP 304 < 309
Total FP CONTRA 79 > 74
Total FP INCONS 163 < 185
Total FP COMP 62 > 50
Total FN 198 < 249
P-value 5.06544643719e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

  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 RNAsubopt and RNAwolf).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for RNAsubopt and RNAwolf. 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 RNAwolf).

^top





Performance of RNAsubopt - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNAsubopt

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 264
Total TN 35278
Total FP 304
Total FP CONTRA 79
Total FP INCONS 163
Total FP COMP 62
Total FN 198
Total Scores
MCC 0.540
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.517 ± 0.117
Sensitivity 0.571
Positive Predictive Value 0.522
Nr of predictions 22

^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 -0.03 0.00 0.00 0 513 15 3 12 0 18
2M58_A - 0.60 0.58 0.64 7 533 4 1 3 0 5
3J0L_a - 0.35 0.36 0.36 4 400 8 3 4 1 7
3J20_0 0.51 0.57 0.48 12 1194 14 2 11 1 9
3J3D_C 0.65 0.74 0.58 14 944 10 5 5 0 5
3J3E_8 0.25 0.33 0.20 5 2717 32 7 13 12 10
3J3F_8 0.35 0.47 0.26 9 4726 42 13 13 16 10
3RKF_A 0.91 0.83 1.00 20 846 0 0 0 0 4
3SD1_A 0.73 0.72 0.75 21 1505 7 4 3 0 8
3U4M_B - 0.49 0.55 0.46 12 1250 14 3 11 0 10
3W1K_J 0.97 0.97 0.97 30 1647 1 1 0 0 1
3W3S_B 0.95 0.94 0.97 31 1957 2 0 1 1 2
3ZEX_C 0.30 0.34 0.26 10 5336 43 5 23 15 19
4A1C_2 0.18 0.25 0.14 5 4481 43 13 17 13 15
4AOB_A 0.62 0.62 0.64 18 1409 11 4 6 1 11
4ATO_G - 0.36 0.43 0.33 3 211 6 6 0 0 4
4ENB_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 461 2 0 0 2 4
4ENC_A 0.36 0.33 0.42 5 484 7 0 7 0 10
4FRG_B 0.36 0.38 0.38 9 1178 15 2 13 0 15
4FRN_A 0.58 0.57 0.59 16 1821 11 3 8 0 12
4JF2_A 0.69 0.67 0.73 16 1060 6 4 2 0 8
4JRC_A - 0.34 0.35 0.35 6 605 11 0 11 0 11

^top



Performance of RNAwolf - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNAwolf

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 213
Total TN 35312
Total FP 309
Total FP CONTRA 74
Total FP INCONS 185
Total FP COMP 50
Total FN 249
Total Scores
MCC 0.449
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.438 ± 0.133
Sensitivity 0.461
Positive Predictive Value 0.451
Nr of predictions 22

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.52 0.50 0.56 9 512 7 0 7 0 9
2M58_A - 0.60 0.58 0.64 7 533 4 1 3 0 5
3J0L_a - 0.14 0.18 0.14 2 397 13 4 8 1 9
3J20_0 0.54 0.57 0.52 12 1196 12 2 9 1 9
3J3D_C 0.92 0.95 0.90 18 948 3 2 0 1 1
3J3E_8 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 2719 37 6 17 14 15
3J3F_8 0.28 0.37 0.23 7 4730 39 9 15 15 12
3RKF_A 0.89 0.83 0.95 20 845 1 0 1 0 4
3SD1_A 0.58 0.59 0.59 17 1504 12 2 10 0 12
3U4M_B - 0.50 0.50 0.52 11 1255 12 1 9 2 11
3W1K_J 0.81 0.77 0.86 24 1650 5 0 4 1 7
3W3S_B 0.70 0.70 0.72 23 1957 10 0 9 1 10
3ZEX_C 0.08 0.10 0.07 3 5328 43 18 25 0 26
4A1C_2 0.12 0.15 0.10 3 4487 38 12 14 12 17
4AOB_A 0.26 0.24 0.30 7 1414 17 2 14 1 22
4ATO_G - -0.03 0.00 0.00 0 213 7 4 3 0 7
4ENB_A 0.45 0.40 0.55 6 461 5 1 4 0 9
4ENC_A 0.34 0.33 0.38 5 483 9 0 8 1 10
4FRG_B 0.54 0.50 0.60 12 1182 8 3 5 0 12
4FRN_A -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1828 20 1 19 0 28
4JF2_A 0.72 0.67 0.80 16 1062 4 4 0 0 8
4JRC_A - 0.71 0.65 0.79 11 608 3 2 1 0 6

^top


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