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 MXScarna(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

  4. Performance of CentroidHomfold‑LAST - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric MXScarna(seed) CentroidHomfold‑LAST
MCC 0.620 > 0.584
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.586 ± 0.091 > 0.582 ± 0.105
Sensitivity 0.503 > 0.491
Positive Predictive Value 0.770 > 0.701
Total TP 455 > 444
Total TN 123402 > 123360
Total FP 173 < 218
Total FP CONTRA 18 < 21
Total FP INCONS 118 < 168
Total FP COMP 37 > 29
Total FN 449 < 460
P-value 5.10776592382e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

  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 MXScarna(seed) and CentroidHomfold‑LAST).

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

^top





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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 455
Total TN 123402
Total FP 173
Total FP CONTRA 18
Total FP INCONS 118
Total FP COMP 37
Total FN 449
Total Scores
MCC 0.620
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.586 ± 0.091
Sensitivity 0.503
Positive Predictive Value 0.770
Nr of predictions 25

^top



2. Individual counts for MXScarna(seed) [ 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 1530 12 0 10 2 20
3AMU_B 0.84 0.70 1.00 19 2984 1 0 0 1 8
3J16_L 0.82 0.67 1.00 20 2755 0 0 0 0 10
3J20_0 0.79 0.63 1.00 19 2831 0 0 0 0 11
3J20_1 0.93 0.87 1.00 20 2906 0 0 0 0 3
3J2L_3 0.60 0.49 0.74 26 7840 11 1 8 2 27
3J3E_8 0.16 0.09 0.27 3 7492 14 1 7 6 30
3J3E_7 0.70 0.59 0.82 32 7101 7 2 5 0 22
3J3F_8 0.45 0.33 0.60 12 12226 18 1 7 10 24
3J3F_7 0.78 0.70 0.88 35 7220 6 2 3 1 15
3J3V_B 0.56 0.46 0.70 26 6984 11 1 10 0 31
3RKF_A 0.72 0.53 1.00 18 2193 0 0 0 0 16
3SD1_A 0.63 0.55 0.74 23 3885 8 1 7 0 19
3UZL_B 0.66 0.49 0.90 18 3550 2 1 1 0 19
3W3S_B 0.69 0.60 0.80 24 4723 6 0 6 0 16
3ZEX_D 0.76 0.69 0.83 34 6980 7 1 6 0 15
3ZND_W 0.44 0.39 0.50 9 2985 11 0 9 2 14
4A1C_3 0.75 0.65 0.88 35 7100 5 1 4 0 19
4A1C_2 0.35 0.24 0.50 8 11765 20 1 7 12 25
4AOB_A 0.66 0.55 0.79 23 4342 7 0 6 1 19
4ENB_A 0.48 0.32 0.75 6 1267 2 0 2 0 13
4ENC_A 0.43 0.32 0.60 6 1316 4 1 3 0 13
4FRG_B 0.41 0.31 0.56 10 3468 8 2 6 0 22
4FRN_A 0.62 0.53 0.73 19 5125 7 2 5 0 17
4JF2_A 0.44 0.32 0.63 10 2834 6 0 6 0 21

^top



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

1. Total counts & total scores for CentroidHomfold‑LAST

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 444
Total TN 123360
Total FP 218
Total FP CONTRA 21
Total FP INCONS 168
Total FP COMP 29
Total FN 460
Total Scores
MCC 0.584
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.582 ± 0.105
Sensitivity 0.491
Positive Predictive Value 0.701
Nr of predictions 25

^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
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


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