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 RNASLOpt - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric MXScarna(seed) RNASLOpt
MCC 0.605 > 0.488
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.568 ± 0.096 > 0.504 ± 0.106
Sensitivity 0.487 > 0.398
Positive Predictive Value 0.757 > 0.604
Total TP 434 > 355
Total TN 132672 > 132657
Total FP 186 < 281
Total FP CONTRA 20 < 24
Total FP INCONS 119 < 209
Total FP COMP 47 < 48
Total FN 457 < 536
P-value 5.19332990918e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of MXScarna(seed) and RNASLOpt. 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 RNASLOpt).

  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 RNASLOpt).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for MXScarna(seed) and RNASLOpt. 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 RNASLOpt).

^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 434
Total TN 132672
Total FP 186
Total FP CONTRA 20
Total FP INCONS 119
Total FP COMP 47
Total FN 457
Total Scores
MCC 0.605
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.568 ± 0.096
Sensitivity 0.487
Positive Predictive Value 0.757
Nr of predictions 24

^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
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_7 0.70 0.59 0.82 32 7101 7 2 5 0 22
3J3E_8 0.16 0.09 0.27 3 7492 14 1 7 6 30
3J3F_7 0.78 0.70 0.88 35 7220 6 2 3 1 15
3J3F_8 0.45 0.33 0.60 12 12226 18 1 7 10 24
3J3V_B 0.56 0.46 0.70 26 6984 11 1 10 0 31
3UZL_B 0.66 0.49 0.90 18 3550 2 1 1 0 19
3W1K_J 0.84 0.76 0.94 29 4155 2 1 1 0 9
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
3ZEX_C 0.32 0.19 0.53 10 14177 20 2 7 11 42
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 RNASLOpt - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNASLOpt

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 355
Total TN 132657
Total FP 281
Total FP CONTRA 24
Total FP INCONS 209
Total FP COMP 48
Total FN 536
Total Scores
MCC 0.488
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.504 ± 0.106
Sensitivity 0.398
Positive Predictive Value 0.604
Nr of predictions 24

^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
2LC8_A 0.47 0.35 0.64 7 1529 4 0 4 0 13
3J16_L 0.53 0.40 0.71 12 2758 5 0 5 0 18
3J20_0 0.66 0.57 0.77 17 2828 6 1 4 1 13
3J20_1 0.96 0.91 1.00 21 2905 0 0 0 0 2
3J2L_3 0.56 0.43 0.72 23 7843 11 0 9 2 30
3J3E_7 0.48 0.35 0.66 19 7111 10 0 10 0 35
3J3E_8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 7483 30 1 19 10 33
3J3F_7 0.18 0.16 0.22 8 7224 28 1 27 0 42
3J3F_8 0.34 0.33 0.35 12 12212 35 3 19 13 24
3J3V_B 0.46 0.33 0.63 19 6991 11 0 11 0 38
3UZL_B 0.48 0.32 0.71 12 3553 5 0 5 0 25
3W1K_J 0.84 0.74 0.97 28 4157 1 1 0 0 10
3W3S_B 0.82 0.70 0.97 28 4724 2 0 1 1 12
3ZEX_D 0.76 0.59 0.97 29 6991 1 0 1 0 20
3ZEX_C 0.26 0.21 0.33 11 14163 35 2 20 13 41
3ZND_W 0.21 0.22 0.22 5 2980 20 1 17 2 18
4A1C_3 0.67 0.52 0.88 28 7108 4 0 4 0 26
4A1C_2 0.23 0.24 0.22 8 11744 35 8 21 6 25
4AOB_A 0.26 0.19 0.38 8 4350 13 2 11 0 34
4ENB_A 0.76 0.58 1.00 11 1264 0 0 0 0 8
4ENC_A 0.65 0.47 0.90 9 1316 1 1 0 0 10
4FRG_B 0.56 0.47 0.68 15 3464 7 1 6 0 17
4FRN_A 0.20 0.17 0.26 6 5128 17 2 15 0 30
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.