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 MaxExpect - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

  4. Performance of ProbKnot - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric MaxExpect ProbKnot
MCC 0.482 > 0.478
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.501 ± 0.070 > 0.500 ± 0.069
Sensitivity 0.419 < 0.423
Positive Predictive Value 0.557 > 0.542
Total TP 1516 < 1531
Total TN 2725760 > 2725661
Total FP 1326 < 1413
Total FP CONTRA 120 < 151
Total FP INCONS 1088 < 1141
Total FP COMP 118 < 121
Total FN 2105 > 2090
P-value 3.56938820447e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of MaxExpect and ProbKnot. 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 MaxExpect and ProbKnot).

  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 MaxExpect and ProbKnot).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for MaxExpect and ProbKnot. 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 MaxExpect and ProbKnot).

^top





Performance of MaxExpect - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for MaxExpect

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 1516
Total TN 2725760
Total FP 1326
Total FP CONTRA 120
Total FP INCONS 1088
Total FP COMP 118
Total FN 2105
Total Scores
MCC 0.482
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.501 ± 0.070
Sensitivity 0.419
Positive Predictive Value 0.557
Nr of predictions 61

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KRL_A - 0.76 0.60 0.96 24 5126 5 0 1 4 16
2KX8_A 0.94 0.89 1.00 16 845 0 0 0 0 2
2LA5_A - 0.39 0.26 0.63 5 622 3 1 2 0 14
2LC8_A -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1525 15 2 13 0 20
2LKR_A - 0.81 0.74 0.88 29 6072 6 0 4 2 10
2M58_A - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1640 13 0 13 0 17
2XQD_Y 0.88 0.78 1.00 21 2829 0 0 0 0 6
3AKZ_H 0.84 0.75 0.95 21 2679 1 1 0 0 7
3AM1_B - 0.78 0.71 0.86 25 3211 4 0 4 0 10
3AMU_B 0.64 0.59 0.70 16 2980 9 0 7 2 11
3IYQ_A 0.29 0.31 0.27 29 60617 84 19 61 4 65
3IZ4_A 0.54 0.46 0.64 61 70781 39 3 31 5 71
3IZF_C 0.71 0.61 0.83 33 6863 7 1 6 0 21
3J0L_7 - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1213 12 0 12 0 17
3J0L_2 - 0.25 0.24 0.26 8 6185 25 2 21 2 25
3J0L_g - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 461 4 1 3 0 4
3J0L_a - 0.39 0.31 0.50 5 1118 5 2 3 0 11
3J16_L 0.29 0.23 0.37 7 2756 12 0 12 0 23
3J20_2 0.49 0.44 0.56 276 1116272 221 10 207 4 357
3J20_1 0.73 0.70 0.76 16 2905 5 0 5 0 7
3J20_0 0.44 0.40 0.50 12 2826 13 0 12 1 18
3J2C_O - 0.63 0.51 0.78 32 10255 10 0 9 1 31
3J2C_M - 0.38 0.31 0.47 64 106354 76 10 63 3 143
3J2L_3 0.62 0.53 0.74 28 7837 12 0 10 2 25
3J3D_C 0.47 0.43 0.52 12 2752 11 1 10 0 16
3J3E_7 0.46 0.37 0.59 20 7106 14 1 13 0 34
3J3E_8 0.07 0.06 0.08 2 7478 32 2 21 9 31
3J3F_8 0.32 0.31 0.33 11 12213 36 3 19 14 25
3J3F_7 0.79 0.68 0.92 34 7223 4 0 3 1 16
3J3V_B 0.50 0.40 0.62 23 6984 14 1 13 0 34
3NDB_M - 0.78 0.69 0.89 42 9133 6 0 5 1 19
3NKB_B - 0.59 0.54 0.67 14 1995 7 0 7 0 12
3NPB_A 0.71 0.61 0.82 28 6987 9 0 6 3 18
3O58_3 0.35 0.34 0.35 12 12369 35 2 20 13 23
3O58_2 0.75 0.76 0.74 29 7221 11 3 7 1 9
3PDR_A 0.76 0.63 0.94 45 12832 5 0 3 2 27
3RKF_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2191 0 0 0 0 14
3SD1_A 0.58 0.48 0.71 20 3888 8 1 7 0 22
3U4M_B - 0.45 0.35 0.59 13 3138 9 1 8 0 24
3UZL_B 0.77 0.62 0.96 23 3546 1 0 1 0 14
3W1K_J 0.87 0.79 0.97 30 4155 1 1 0 0 8
3W3S_B 0.88 0.78 1.00 31 4722 1 0 0 1 9
3ZEX_B - 0.30 0.26 0.35 147 1071957 289 29 247 13 411
3ZEX_F - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2617 11 2 9 0 12
3ZEX_C 0.41 0.27 0.64 14 14174 16 2 6 8 38
3ZEX_H - 0.19 0.18 0.19 7 9009 29 5 24 0 31
3ZEX_D 0.69 0.61 0.79 30 6983 8 1 7 0 19
3ZEX_E - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 21893 54 2 50 2 77
3ZEX_G - 0.77 0.66 0.91 49 16417 11 0 5 6 25
3ZND_W 0.20 0.22 0.19 5 2977 23 1 20 2 18
4A1C_2 0.14 0.15 0.14 5 11746 41 4 26 11 28
4A1C_3 0.69 0.57 0.84 31 7103 6 0 6 0 23
4AOB_A 0.50 0.40 0.63 17 4344 11 2 8 1 25
4ATO_G - 0.38 0.30 0.50 3 522 3 0 3 0 7
4ENB_A 0.76 0.58 1.00 11 1264 0 0 0 0 8
4ENC_A 0.31 0.26 0.38 5 1313 8 1 7 0 14
4FNJ_A - 0.79 0.63 1.00 10 585 0 0 0 0 6
4FRG_B 0.30 0.22 0.41 7 3469 10 1 9 0 25
4FRN_A 0.45 0.36 0.57 13 5128 10 2 8 0 23
4JF2_A 0.78 0.61 1.00 19 2831 0 0 0 0 12
4JRC_A - 0.29 0.26 0.35 6 1523 11 0 11 0 17

^top



Performance of ProbKnot - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for ProbKnot

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 1531
Total TN 2725661
Total FP 1413
Total FP CONTRA 151
Total FP INCONS 1141
Total FP COMP 121
Total FN 2090
Total Scores
MCC 0.478
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.500 ± 0.069
Sensitivity 0.423
Positive Predictive Value 0.542
Nr of predictions 61

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KRL_A - 0.69 0.60 0.80 24 5121 11 2 4 5 16
2KX8_A 0.94 0.89 1.00 16 845 0 0 0 0 2
2LA5_A - 0.45 0.32 0.67 6 621 3 0 3 0 13
2LC8_A -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1525 15 2 13 0 20
2LKR_A - 0.85 0.77 0.94 30 6073 4 0 2 2 9
2M58_A - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1638 15 0 15 0 17
2XQD_Y 0.90 0.81 1.00 22 2828 1 0 0 1 5
3AKZ_H 0.73 0.75 0.72 21 2672 8 4 4 0 7
3AM1_B - 0.74 0.71 0.78 25 3208 7 1 6 0 10
3AMU_B 0.65 0.59 0.73 16 2981 8 0 6 2 11
3IYQ_A 0.28 0.31 0.26 29 60616 85 22 59 4 65
3IZ4_A 0.52 0.46 0.60 61 70774 46 6 35 5 71
3IZF_C 0.72 0.61 0.85 33 6864 6 0 6 0 21
3J0L_7 - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1212 13 0 13 0 17
3J0L_2 - 0.27 0.27 0.28 9 6184 26 2 21 3 24
3J0L_g - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 458 7 2 5 0 4
3J0L_a - 0.55 0.50 0.62 8 1115 5 2 3 0 8
3J16_L 0.35 0.33 0.38 10 2749 16 1 15 0 20
3J20_2 0.50 0.43 0.57 272 1116290 208 11 192 5 361
3J20_1 0.71 0.70 0.73 16 2904 7 0 6 1 7
3J20_0 0.45 0.40 0.52 12 2827 12 0 11 1 18
3J2C_O - 0.60 0.52 0.70 33 10249 15 0 14 1 30
3J2C_M - 0.37 0.30 0.45 63 106352 79 9 67 3 144
3J2L_3 0.60 0.49 0.74 26 7840 11 0 9 2 27
3J3D_C 0.46 0.43 0.50 12 2751 12 1 11 0 16
3J3E_7 0.47 0.35 0.63 19 7110 11 0 11 0 35
3J3E_8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 7476 37 3 24 10 33
3J3F_8 0.35 0.33 0.36 12 12213 35 3 18 14 24
3J3F_7 0.76 0.64 0.91 32 7225 3 0 3 0 18
3J3V_B 0.53 0.42 0.67 24 6985 12 1 11 0 33
3NDB_M - 0.77 0.69 0.88 42 9132 7 0 6 1 19
3NKB_B - 0.59 0.54 0.67 14 1995 7 0 7 0 12
3NPB_A 0.72 0.61 0.85 28 6988 8 1 4 3 18
3O58_3 0.31 0.34 0.29 12 12362 41 4 25 12 23
3O58_2 0.76 0.76 0.76 29 7222 10 3 6 1 9
3PDR_A 0.74 0.64 0.85 46 12826 10 1 7 2 26
3RKF_A 0.73 0.59 0.91 20 2189 2 1 1 0 14
3SD1_A 0.55 0.48 0.65 20 3885 11 2 9 0 22
3U4M_B - 0.45 0.35 0.59 13 3138 9 1 8 0 24
3UZL_B 0.73 0.62 0.85 23 3543 4 0 4 0 14
3W1K_J 0.87 0.79 0.97 30 4155 1 1 0 0 8
3W3S_B 0.89 0.80 1.00 32 4721 1 0 0 1 8
3ZEX_B - 0.29 0.26 0.33 146 1071940 307 34 260 13 412
3ZEX_F - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2620 11 2 6 3 12
3ZEX_C 0.38 0.31 0.47 16 14162 21 2 16 3 36
3ZEX_H - 0.19 0.18 0.19 7 9009 29 4 25 0 31
3ZEX_D 0.77 0.67 0.89 33 6984 4 0 4 0 16
3ZEX_E - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 21886 61 2 57 2 77
3ZEX_G - 0.77 0.66 0.91 49 16417 10 0 5 5 25
3ZND_W 0.20 0.22 0.19 5 2977 24 1 20 3 18
4A1C_2 0.13 0.15 0.12 5 11738 49 7 31 11 28
4A1C_3 0.73 0.61 0.87 33 7102 6 1 4 1 21
4AOB_A 0.50 0.40 0.63 17 4344 11 2 8 1 25
4ATO_G - 0.32 0.30 0.38 3 520 5 1 4 0 7
4ENB_A 0.73 0.58 0.92 11 1263 1 1 0 0 8
4ENC_A 0.45 0.42 0.50 8 1310 8 1 7 0 11
4FNJ_A - 0.66 0.50 0.89 8 586 1 0 1 0 8
4FRG_B 0.37 0.31 0.45 10 3464 12 3 9 0 22
4FRN_A 0.44 0.36 0.54 13 5127 11 2 9 0 23
4JF2_A 0.80 0.71 0.92 22 2826 2 2 0 0 9
4JRC_A - 0.25 0.22 0.31 5 1524 11 0 11 0 18

^top


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