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 NanoFolder - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric NanoFolder Carnac(seed)
MCC 0.289 > 0.273
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.316 ± 0.172 > 0.136 ± 0.218
Sensitivity 0.308 > 0.075
Positive Predictive Value 0.279 < 1.000
Total TP 95 > 23
Total TN 53170 < 53487
Total FP 278 > 0
Total FP CONTRA 36 > 0
Total FP INCONS 209 > 0
Total FP COMP 33 > 0
Total FN 213 < 285
P-value 0.0

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of NanoFolder and Carnac(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 NanoFolder and Carnac(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 NanoFolder and Carnac(seed)).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for NanoFolder and Carnac(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 NanoFolder and Carnac(seed)).

^top





Performance of NanoFolder - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for NanoFolder

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 95
Total TN 53170
Total FP 278
Total FP CONTRA 36
Total FP INCONS 209
Total FP COMP 33
Total FN 213
Total Scores
MCC 0.289
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.316 ± 0.172
Sensitivity 0.308
Positive Predictive Value 0.279
Nr of predictions 9

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.52 0.55 0.50 11 1518 11 0 11 0 9
3J3E_8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 7466 47 6 31 10 33
3J3F_8 0.27 0.33 0.22 12 12192 54 9 33 12 24
3W3S_B 0.17 0.18 0.18 7 4713 34 1 32 1 33
4A1C_3 0.48 0.46 0.51 25 7091 24 2 22 0 29
4A1C_2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 11728 61 12 41 8 33
4AOB_A 0.33 0.29 0.39 12 4340 20 1 18 1 30
4ENC_A 0.57 0.58 0.58 11 1307 9 0 8 1 8
4JF2_A 0.51 0.55 0.49 17 2815 18 5 13 0 14

^top



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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 23
Total TN 53487
Total FP 0
Total FP CONTRA 0
Total FP INCONS 0
Total FP COMP 0
Total FN 285
Total Scores
MCC 0.273
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.136 ± 0.218
Sensitivity 0.075
Positive Predictive Value 1.000
Nr of predictions 9

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.44 0.20 1.00 4 1536 0 0 0 0 16
3J3E_8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 7503 0 0 0 0 33
3J3F_8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 12246 0 0 0 0 36
3W3S_B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 4753 0 0 0 0 40
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
4ENC_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1326 0 0 0 0 19
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.