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 RNASampler(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

  4. Performance of CentroidHomfold‑LAST - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

  5. Compile and download dataset for RNASampler(20) & CentroidHomfold‑LAST [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric RNASampler(20) CentroidHomfold‑LAST
MCC 0.605 > 0.584
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.611 ± 0.099 > 0.589 ± 0.107
Sensitivity 0.466 < 0.491
Positive Predictive Value 0.791 > 0.700
Total TP 344 < 362
Total TN 105694 > 105612
Total FP 123 < 183
Total FP CONTRA 6 < 18
Total FP INCONS 85 < 137
Total FP COMP 32 > 28
Total FN 394 > 376
P-value 2.14303126762e-07

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of RNASampler(20) and CentroidHomfold-LAST. 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 RNASampler(20) and CentroidHomfold‑LAST).

  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 RNASampler(20) and CentroidHomfold‑LAST).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for RNASampler(20) and CentroidHomfold-LAST. 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 RNASampler(20) and CentroidHomfold‑LAST).

^top





Performance of RNASampler(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNASampler(20)

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 344
Total TN 105694
Total FP 123
Total FP CONTRA 6
Total FP INCONS 85
Total FP COMP 32
Total FN 394
Total Scores
MCC 0.605
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.611 ± 0.099
Sensitivity 0.466
Positive Predictive Value 0.791
Nr of predictions 20

^top



2. Individual counts for RNASampler(20) [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
3AMU_B 0.82 0.70 0.95 19 2983 3 0 1 2 8
3J20_0 0.80 0.67 0.95 20 2829 2 0 1 1 10
3J20_1 0.96 0.91 1.00 21 2905 0 0 0 0 2
3J2L_3 0.45 0.32 0.63 17 7848 12 1 9 2 36
3J3D_C 0.82 0.71 0.95 20 2754 1 0 1 0 8
3J3E_8 0.12 0.09 0.18 3 7486 21 2 12 7 30
3J3E_7 0.62 0.48 0.81 26 7108 6 0 6 0 28
3J3F_8 0.39 0.33 0.46 12 12220 17 1 13 3 24
3J3F_7 0.66 0.52 0.84 26 7229 5 0 5 0 24
3J3V_B 0.63 0.42 0.96 24 6996 1 0 1 0 33
3RKF_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2191 0 0 0 0 14
3SD1_A 0.67 0.48 0.95 20 3895 1 0 1 0 22
3ZEX_D 0.68 0.49 0.96 24 6996 1 0 1 0 25
3ZND_W 0.41 0.39 0.43 9 2982 15 2 10 3 14
4A1C_3 0.74 0.56 1.00 30 7110 0 0 0 0 24
4A1C_2 0.18 0.15 0.23 5 11759 30 0 17 13 28
4AOB_A 0.58 0.40 0.85 17 4351 4 0 3 1 25
4ENB_A 0.60 0.37 1.00 7 1268 0 0 0 0 12
4ENC_A 0.76 0.58 1.00 11 1315 0 0 0 0 8
4FRG_B 0.55 0.41 0.76 13 3469 4 0 4 0 19

^top



Performance of CentroidHomfold‑LAST - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for CentroidHomfold‑LAST

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 362
Total TN 105612
Total FP 183
Total FP CONTRA 18
Total FP INCONS 137
Total FP COMP 28
Total FN 376
Total Scores
MCC 0.584
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.589 ± 0.107
Sensitivity 0.491
Positive Predictive Value 0.700
Nr of predictions 20

^top



2. Individual counts for CentroidHomfold‑LAST [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
3AMU_B 0.82 0.70 0.95 19 2983 3 0 1 2 8
3J20_0 0.35 0.37 0.34 11 2818 22 3 18 1 19
3J20_1 0.96 0.91 1.00 21 2905 0 0 0 0 2
3J2L_3 0.73 0.62 0.87 33 7837 7 0 5 2 20
3J3D_C 0.68 0.61 0.77 17 2753 5 0 5 0 11
3J3E_8 0.05 0.03 0.08 1 7490 16 1 11 4 32
3J3E_7 0.64 0.54 0.76 29 7102 9 0 9 0 25
3J3F_8 0.33 0.33 0.33 12 12210 33 4 20 9 24
3J3F_7 0.65 0.58 0.74 29 7221 10 1 9 0 21
3J3V_B 0.51 0.37 0.72 21 6992 8 1 7 0 36
3RKF_A 0.72 0.53 1.00 18 2193 0 0 0 0 16
3SD1_A 0.64 0.45 0.90 19 3895 2 0 2 0 23
3ZEX_D 0.75 0.65 0.86 32 6984 5 0 5 0 17
3ZND_W 0.47 0.39 0.56 9 2987 10 0 7 3 14
4A1C_3 0.68 0.56 0.83 30 7104 6 0 6 0 24
4A1C_2 0.16 0.15 0.18 5 11753 29 5 18 6 28
4AOB_A 0.71 0.50 1.00 21 4350 1 0 0 1 21
4ENB_A 0.76 0.58 1.00 11 1264 0 0 0 0 8
4ENC_A 0.76 0.58 1.00 11 1315 0 0 0 0 8
4FRG_B 0.41 0.41 0.43 13 3456 17 3 14 0 19

^top


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