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 RNAalifold(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

  4. Performance of Mastr(20) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

  5. Compile and download dataset for RNAalifold(20) & Mastr(20) [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric RNAalifold(20) Mastr(20)
MCC 0.656 > 0.500
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.654 ± 0.059 > 0.458 ± 0.108
Sensitivity 0.511 > 0.336
Positive Predictive Value 0.846 > 0.749
Total TP 769 > 506
Total TN 283798 < 284031
Total FP 189 < 202
Total FP CONTRA 25 > 19
Total FP INCONS 115 < 151
Total FP COMP 49 > 32
Total FN 735 < 998
P-value 5.23657817852e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of RNAalifold(20) and Mastr(20). 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 RNAalifold(20) and Mastr(20)).

  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 RNAalifold(20) and Mastr(20)).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for RNAalifold(20) and Mastr(20). 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 RNAalifold(20) and Mastr(20)).

^top





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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 769
Total TN 283798
Total FP 189
Total FP CONTRA 25
Total FP INCONS 115
Total FP COMP 49
Total FN 735
Total Scores
MCC 0.656
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.654 ± 0.059
Sensitivity 0.511
Positive Predictive Value 0.846
Nr of predictions 38

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KDQ_B 0.60 0.36 1.00 4 402 0 0 0 0 7
2WRQ_Y 0.57 0.59 0.56 10 2832 11 5 3 3 7
2XQD_Y 0.88 0.78 1.00 21 2829 0 0 0 0 6
3A2K_C 0.86 0.75 1.00 21 2905 0 0 0 0 7
3AMU_B 0.86 0.74 1.00 20 2983 1 0 0 1 7
3G4S_9 0.69 0.49 0.97 28 7352 3 1 0 2 29
3GX2_A 0.77 0.60 1.00 24 4347 1 0 0 1 16
3IVN_B 0.74 0.58 0.95 18 2327 1 1 0 0 13
3IZ4_A 0.53 0.35 0.82 46 70820 15 4 6 5 86
3IZF_C 0.71 0.59 0.86 32 6866 5 1 4 0 22
3J20_0 0.84 0.70 1.00 21 2829 0 0 0 0 9
3J20_1 0.96 0.91 1.00 21 2905 0 0 0 0 2
3J2L_3 0.69 0.47 1.00 25 7850 2 0 0 2 28
3J3D_C 0.80 0.68 0.95 19 2755 1 0 1 0 9
3J3E_7 0.69 0.56 0.86 30 7105 5 1 4 0 24
3J3E_8 0.23 0.15 0.36 5 7489 9 1 8 0 28
3J3F_7 0.74 0.58 0.94 29 7229 2 0 2 0 21
3J3F_8 0.48 0.39 0.58 14 12222 17 1 9 7 22
3J3V_B 0.65 0.49 0.88 28 6989 4 0 4 0 29
3JYV_7 0.81 0.66 1.00 21 2829 0 0 0 0 11
3JYX_4 0.39 0.30 0.50 10 12226 15 0 10 5 23
3JYX_3 0.60 0.52 0.70 14 6308 17 0 6 11 13
3LA5_A 0.75 0.56 1.00 19 2466 0 0 0 0 15
3NPB_A 0.68 0.48 0.96 22 6998 3 1 0 2 24
3O58_2 0.79 0.76 0.83 29 7225 7 3 3 1 9
3O58_3 0.37 0.26 0.53 9 12386 8 2 6 0 26
3PDR_A 0.76 0.61 0.96 44 12834 3 0 2 1 28
3RKF_A 0.68 0.50 0.94 17 2193 1 0 1 0 17
3SD1_A 0.70 0.60 0.83 25 3886 5 1 4 0 17
3ZEX_D 0.80 0.69 0.92 34 6984 3 0 3 0 15
3ZEX_C 0.39 0.27 0.56 14 14171 14 1 10 3 38
3ZND_W 0.47 0.43 0.53 10 2984 11 0 9 2 13
4A1C_2 0.17 0.15 0.19 5 11755 23 2 19 2 28
4A1C_3 0.74 0.57 0.97 31 7108 1 0 1 0 23
4AOB_A 0.72 0.52 1.00 22 4349 1 0 0 1 20
4ENB_A 0.46 0.21 1.00 4 1271 0 0 0 0 15
4ENC_A 0.56 0.32 1.00 6 1320 0 0 0 0 13
4FRG_B 0.73 0.53 1.00 17 3469 0 0 0 0 15

^top



Performance of Mastr(20) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 506
Total TN 284031
Total FP 202
Total FP CONTRA 19
Total FP INCONS 151
Total FP COMP 32
Total FN 998
Total Scores
MCC 0.500
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.458 ± 0.108
Sensitivity 0.336
Positive Predictive Value 0.749
Nr of predictions 38

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KDQ_B 0.95 0.91 1.00 10 396 0 0 0 0 1
2WRQ_Y 0.57 0.59 0.56 10 2832 12 5 3 4 7
2XQD_Y 0.88 0.78 1.00 21 2829 0 0 0 0 6
3A2K_C 0.72 0.61 0.85 17 2906 3 0 3 0 11
3AMU_B 0.77 0.59 1.00 16 2987 1 0 0 1 11
3G4S_9 0.48 0.32 0.75 18 7357 8 1 5 2 39
3GX2_A 0.39 0.28 0.55 11 4351 10 0 9 1 29
3IVN_B 0.78 0.65 0.95 20 2325 1 1 0 0 11
3IZ4_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 70876 0 0 0 0 132
3IZF_C 0.73 0.63 0.85 34 6863 7 1 5 1 20
3J20_0 0.84 0.70 1.00 21 2829 1 0 0 1 9
3J20_1 0.25 0.22 0.29 5 2909 12 0 12 0 18
3J2L_3 0.34 0.25 0.48 13 7848 16 1 13 2 40
3J3D_C 0.82 0.71 0.95 20 2754 1 0 1 0 8
3J3E_7 0.66 0.57 0.76 31 7099 10 1 9 0 23
3J3E_8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 7503 0 0 0 0 33
3J3F_7 0.72 0.64 0.82 32 7221 8 0 7 1 18
3J3F_8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 12246 0 0 0 0 36
3J3V_B 0.19 0.12 0.30 7 6998 16 0 16 0 50
3JYV_7 0.81 0.66 1.00 21 2829 0 0 0 0 11
3JYX_4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 12246 0 0 0 0 33
3JYX_3 0.56 0.56 0.58 15 6302 23 1 10 12 12
3LA5_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2465 0 0 0 0 14
3NPB_A 0.30 0.24 0.39 11 6993 18 1 16 1 35
3O58_2 0.76 0.76 0.76 29 7222 12 3 6 3 9
3O58_3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 12403 0 0 0 0 35
3PDR_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 12880 0 0 0 0 72
3RKF_A 0.70 0.50 1.00 17 2194 0 0 0 0 17
3SD1_A 0.61 0.50 0.75 21 3888 7 1 6 0 21
3ZEX_D 0.80 0.71 0.90 35 6982 4 0 4 0 14
3ZEX_C 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 14196 0 0 0 0 52
3ZND_W -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 2988 16 3 12 1 23
4A1C_2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 11781 0 0 0 0 33
4A1C_3 0.70 0.59 0.84 32 7102 7 0 6 1 22
4AOB_A 0.39 0.26 0.58 11 4352 9 0 8 1 31
4ENB_A 0.39 0.16 1.00 3 1272 0 0 0 0 16
4ENC_A 0.51 0.26 1.00 5 1321 0 0 0 0 14
4FRG_B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 3486 0 0 0 0 32

^top


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