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 RNAsubopt - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric PETfold_pre2.0(seed) RNAsubopt
MCC 0.722 > 0.525
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.699 ± 0.062 > 0.508 ± 0.105
Sensitivity 0.595 > 0.466
Positive Predictive Value 0.879 > 0.599
Total TP 547 > 428
Total TN 135398 > 135305
Total FP 106 < 343
Total FP CONTRA 8 < 29
Total FP INCONS 67 < 258
Total FP COMP 31 < 56
Total FN 372 < 491
P-value 5.1503931209e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

  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 RNAsubopt).

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

^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 RNAsubopt - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNAsubopt

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 428
Total TN 135305
Total FP 343
Total FP CONTRA 29
Total FP INCONS 258
Total FP COMP 56
Total FN 491
Total Scores
MCC 0.525
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.508 ± 0.105
Sensitivity 0.466
Positive Predictive Value 0.599
Nr of predictions 25

^top



2. Individual counts for RNAsubopt [ 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 1525 15 2 13 0 20
3J16_L 0.41 0.37 0.48 11 2752 12 1 11 0 19
3J20_1 0.96 0.91 1.00 21 2905 2 0 0 2 2
3J20_0 0.43 0.40 0.48 12 2825 14 0 13 1 18
3J2L_3 0.61 0.53 0.72 28 7836 13 0 11 2 25
3J3D_C 0.61 0.57 0.67 16 2751 8 0 8 0 12
3J3E_8 0.16 0.15 0.18 5 7475 32 2 21 9 28
3J3E_7 0.59 0.50 0.69 27 7101 12 1 11 0 27
3J3F_7 0.80 0.70 0.92 35 7222 4 0 3 1 15
3J3F_8 0.33 0.33 0.32 12 12209 39 4 21 14 24
3J3V_B 0.54 0.42 0.71 24 6987 10 1 9 0 33
3UZL_B 0.48 0.38 0.61 14 3547 9 0 9 0 23
3W1K_J 0.87 0.79 0.97 30 4155 1 1 0 0 8
3W3S_B 0.87 0.78 0.97 31 4721 2 0 1 1 9
3ZEX_D 0.80 0.69 0.92 34 6984 3 0 3 0 15
3ZEX_C 0.24 0.21 0.28 11 14157 42 1 27 14 41
3ZND_W 0.20 0.22 0.19 5 2977 23 1 20 2 18
4A1C_2 0.14 0.15 0.13 5 11742 43 5 29 9 28
4A1C_3 0.70 0.59 0.82 32 7101 7 1 6 0 22
4AOB_A 0.52 0.43 0.64 18 4343 11 2 8 1 24
4ENB_A 0.70 0.58 0.85 11 1262 2 1 1 0 8
4ENC_A 0.32 0.26 0.42 5 1314 7 0 7 0 14
4FRG_B 0.32 0.28 0.38 9 3462 15 0 15 0 23
4FRN_A 0.51 0.44 0.59 16 5124 11 3 8 0 20
4JF2_A 0.61 0.52 0.73 16 2828 6 3 3 0 15

^top


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