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 PETfold_pre2.0(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

  5. Compile and download dataset for PETfold_pre2.0(seed) & RNASLOpt [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric PETfold_pre2.0(seed) RNASLOpt
MCC 0.722 > 0.499
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.699 ± 0.062 > 0.517 ± 0.105
Sensitivity 0.595 > 0.408
Positive Predictive Value 0.879 > 0.616
Total TP 547 > 375
Total TN 135398 < 135411
Total FP 106 < 282
Total FP CONTRA 8 < 24
Total FP INCONS 67 < 210
Total FP COMP 31 < 48
Total FN 372 < 544
P-value 5.02343278931e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of PETfold_pre2.0(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 PETfold_pre2.0(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 PETfold_pre2.0(seed) and RNASLOpt).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for PETfold_pre2.0(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 PETfold_pre2.0(seed) and RNASLOpt).

^top





Performance of PETfold_pre2.0(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for PETfold_pre2.0(seed)

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 547
Total TN 135398
Total FP 106
Total FP CONTRA 8
Total FP INCONS 67
Total FP COMP 31
Total FN 372
Total Scores
MCC 0.722
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.699 ± 0.062
Sensitivity 0.595
Positive Predictive Value 0.879
Nr of predictions 25

^top



2. Individual counts for PETfold_pre2.0(seed) [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.40 0.30 0.55 6 1529 5 0 5 0 14
3J16_L 0.82 0.70 0.95 21 2753 1 0 1 0 9
3J20_1 0.96 0.91 1.00 21 2905 1 0 0 1 2
3J20_0 0.84 0.70 1.00 21 2829 1 0 0 1 9
3J2L_3 0.77 0.62 0.94 33 7840 4 0 2 2 20
3J3D_C 0.82 0.71 0.95 20 2754 2 0 1 1 8
3J3E_8 0.43 0.30 0.63 10 7487 8 0 6 2 23
3J3E_7 0.78 0.67 0.92 36 7101 3 0 3 0 18
3J3F_7 0.85 0.74 0.97 37 7222 2 0 1 1 13
3J3F_8 0.63 0.53 0.76 19 12221 10 0 6 4 17
3J3V_B 0.76 0.61 0.95 35 6984 3 0 2 1 22
3UZL_B 0.72 0.54 0.95 20 3549 2 1 0 1 17
3W1K_J 0.80 0.68 0.93 26 4158 3 1 1 1 12
3W3S_B 0.78 0.65 0.93 26 4725 4 0 2 2 14
3ZEX_D 0.82 0.73 0.92 36 6982 3 0 3 0 13
3ZEX_C 0.53 0.37 0.76 19 14171 10 1 5 4 33
3ZND_W 0.47 0.43 0.53 10 2984 12 0 9 3 13
4A1C_2 0.57 0.45 0.71 15 11760 12 0 6 6 18
4A1C_3 0.83 0.70 0.97 38 7101 1 0 1 0 16
4AOB_A 0.72 0.57 0.92 24 4345 3 0 2 1 18
4ENB_A 0.50 0.42 0.62 8 1262 5 1 4 0 11
4ENC_A 0.50 0.42 0.62 8 1313 5 1 4 0 11
4FRG_B 0.74 0.63 0.87 20 3463 3 1 2 0 12
4FRN_A 0.73 0.61 0.88 22 5126 3 2 1 0 14
4JF2_A 0.72 0.52 1.00 16 2834 0 0 0 0 15

^top



Performance of RNASLOpt - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNASLOpt

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 375
Total TN 135411
Total FP 282
Total FP CONTRA 24
Total FP INCONS 210
Total FP COMP 48
Total FN 544
Total Scores
MCC 0.499
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.517 ± 0.105
Sensitivity 0.408
Positive Predictive Value 0.616
Nr of predictions 25

^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_1 0.96 0.91 1.00 21 2905 0 0 0 0 2
3J20_0 0.66 0.57 0.77 17 2828 6 1 4 1 13
3J2L_3 0.56 0.43 0.72 23 7843 11 0 9 2 30
3J3D_C 0.82 0.71 0.95 20 2754 1 0 1 0 8
3J3E_8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 7483 30 1 19 10 33
3J3E_7 0.48 0.35 0.66 19 7111 10 0 10 0 35
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_2 0.23 0.24 0.22 8 11744 35 8 21 6 25
4A1C_3 0.67 0.52 0.88 28 7108 4 0 4 0 26
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.