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 CentroidHomfold‑LAST - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

  5. Compile and download dataset for CentroidHomfold‑LAST & Mastr(seed) [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric CentroidHomfold‑LAST Mastr(seed)
MCC 0.588 > 0.034
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.586 ± 0.101 > 0.007 ± 0.015
Sensitivity 0.495 > 0.003
Positive Predictive Value 0.704 > 0.375
Total TP 461 > 3
Total TN 126113 < 126760
Total FP 223 > 5
Total FP CONTRA 21 > 0
Total FP INCONS 173 > 5
Total FP COMP 29 > 0
Total FN 471 < 929
P-value 5.10776592382e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of CentroidHomfold-LAST and Mastr(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 CentroidHomfold‑LAST and Mastr(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 CentroidHomfold‑LAST and Mastr(seed)).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for CentroidHomfold-LAST and Mastr(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 CentroidHomfold‑LAST and Mastr(seed)).

^top





Performance of CentroidHomfold‑LAST - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for CentroidHomfold‑LAST

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 461
Total TN 126113
Total FP 223
Total FP CONTRA 21
Total FP INCONS 173
Total FP COMP 29
Total FN 471
Total Scores
MCC 0.588
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.586 ± 0.101
Sensitivity 0.495
Positive Predictive Value 0.704
Nr of predictions 26

^top



2. Individual counts for CentroidHomfold‑LAST [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1529 11 0 11 0 20
3AMU_B 0.82 0.70 0.95 19 2983 3 0 1 2 8
3J16_L 0.75 0.57 1.00 17 2758 0 0 0 0 13
3J20_0 0.35 0.37 0.34 11 2818 22 3 18 1 19
3J20_1 0.96 0.91 1.00 21 2905 0 0 0 0 2
3J2L_3 0.73 0.62 0.87 33 7837 7 0 5 2 20
3J3D_C 0.68 0.61 0.77 17 2753 5 0 5 0 11
3J3E_8 0.05 0.03 0.08 1 7490 16 1 11 4 32
3J3E_7 0.64 0.54 0.76 29 7102 9 0 9 0 25
3J3F_8 0.33 0.33 0.33 12 12210 33 4 20 9 24
3J3F_7 0.65 0.58 0.74 29 7221 10 1 9 0 21
3J3V_B 0.51 0.37 0.72 21 6992 8 1 7 0 36
3RKF_A 0.72 0.53 1.00 18 2193 0 0 0 0 16
3SD1_A 0.64 0.45 0.90 19 3895 2 0 2 0 23
3UZL_B 0.72 0.54 0.95 20 3549 1 0 1 0 17
3W3S_B 0.85 0.73 1.00 29 4724 1 0 0 1 11
3ZEX_D 0.75 0.65 0.86 32 6984 5 0 5 0 17
3ZND_W 0.47 0.39 0.56 9 2987 10 0 7 3 14
4A1C_3 0.68 0.56 0.83 30 7104 6 0 6 0 24
4A1C_2 0.16 0.15 0.18 5 11753 29 5 18 6 28
4AOB_A 0.71 0.50 1.00 21 4350 1 0 0 1 21
4ENB_A 0.76 0.58 1.00 11 1264 0 0 0 0 8
4ENC_A 0.76 0.58 1.00 11 1315 0 0 0 0 8
4FRG_B 0.41 0.41 0.43 13 3456 17 3 14 0 19
4FRN_A 0.36 0.39 0.34 14 5110 27 3 24 0 22
4JF2_A 0.78 0.61 1.00 19 2831 0 0 0 0 12

^top



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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 3
Total TN 126760
Total FP 5
Total FP CONTRA 0
Total FP INCONS 5
Total FP COMP 0
Total FN 929
Total Scores
MCC 0.034
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.007 ± 0.015
Sensitivity 0.003
Positive Predictive Value 0.375
Nr of predictions 26

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1540 0 0 0 0 20
3AMU_B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 3003 0 0 0 0 27
3J16_L 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2775 0 0 0 0 30
3J20_0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2850 0 0 0 0 30
3J20_1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2926 0 0 0 0 23
3J2L_3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 7875 0 0 0 0 53
3J3D_C 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2775 0 0 0 0 28
3J3E_8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 7503 0 0 0 0 33
3J3E_7 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 7140 0 0 0 0 54
3J3F_8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 12246 0 0 0 0 36
3J3F_7 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 7260 0 0 0 0 50
3J3V_B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 7021 0 0 0 0 57
3RKF_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2211 0 0 0 0 34
3SD1_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 3916 0 0 0 0 42
3UZL_B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 3570 0 0 0 0 37
3W3S_B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 4753 0 0 0 0 40
3ZEX_D 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 7021 0 0 0 0 49
3ZND_W 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 3003 0 0 0 0 23
4A1C_3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 7140 0 0 0 0 54
4A1C_2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 11781 0 0 0 0 33
4AOB_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 4371 0 0 0 0 42
4ENB_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1275 0 0 0 0 19
4ENC_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1326 0 0 0 0 19
4FRG_B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 3486 0 0 0 0 32
4FRN_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 5151 0 0 0 0 36
4JF2_A 0.19 0.10 0.38 3 2842 5 0 5 0 28

^top


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