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 Afold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

  5. Compile and download dataset for Afold & RNASLOpt [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric Afold RNASLOpt
MCC 0.764 > 0.727
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.812 ± 0.151 > 0.792 ± 0.148
Sensitivity 0.781 > 0.721
Positive Predictive Value 0.755 > 0.743
Total TP 207 > 191
Total TN 13770 < 13787
Total FP 108 > 90
Total FP CONTRA 16 < 20
Total FP INCONS 51 > 46
Total FP COMP 41 > 24
Total FN 58 < 74
P-value 2.69132796717e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of Afold 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 Afold and RNASLOpt).

  2. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for Afold 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 Afold and RNASLOpt).

^top





Performance of Afold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Afold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 207
Total TN 13770
Total FP 108
Total FP CONTRA 16
Total FP INCONS 51
Total FP COMP 41
Total FN 58
Total Scores
MCC 0.764
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.812 ± 0.151
Sensitivity 0.781
Positive Predictive Value 0.755
Nr of predictions 18

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.64 0.61 0.69 11 512 6 0 5 1 7
2LDL_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 131 1 0 0 1 0
2LHP_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 15 246 0 0 0 0 0
2LI4_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 14 175 0 0 0 0 0
2LJJ_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 7 123 3 0 0 3 0
2LK3_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 91 0 0 0 0 0
2LKR_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 29 2411 8 0 0 8 0
2LQZ_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 8 124 2 0 0 2 0
2LWK_A - 0.85 0.82 0.90 9 197 2 0 1 1 2
3J0L_1 - 0.83 0.77 0.91 10 473 5 0 1 4 3
3J0L_h - 0.87 0.81 0.93 26 2112 5 1 1 3 6
3J0L_7 - -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 504 15 1 14 0 10
3SN2_B 0.95 0.92 1.00 11 143 0 0 0 0 1
3U4M_B - 0.49 0.55 0.46 12 1250 14 3 11 0 10
3VJR_D - 1.00 1.00 1.00 12 239 1 0 0 1 0
4A1C_2 0.19 0.25 0.15 5 4483 43 11 17 15 15
4A4U_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 96 0 0 0 0 0
4ENB_A 0.81 0.73 0.92 11 460 3 0 1 2 4

^top



Performance of RNASLOpt - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNASLOpt

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 191
Total TN 13787
Total FP 90
Total FP CONTRA 20
Total FP INCONS 46
Total FP COMP 24
Total FN 74
Total Scores
MCC 0.727
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.792 ± 0.148
Sensitivity 0.721
Positive Predictive Value 0.743
Nr of predictions 18

^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 0.48 0.39 0.64 7 517 4 0 4 0 11
2LDL_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 131 1 0 0 1 0
2LHP_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 15 246 0 0 0 0 0
2LI4_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 14 175 0 0 0 0 0
2LJJ_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 7 123 3 0 0 3 0
2LK3_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 91 0 0 0 0 0
2LKR_A - 0.70 0.69 0.71 20 2412 13 1 7 5 9
2LQZ_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 8 124 2 0 0 2 0
2LWK_A - 0.95 0.91 1.00 10 197 1 0 0 1 1
3J0L_1 - 0.73 0.62 0.89 8 475 4 0 1 3 5
3J0L_h - 0.81 0.66 1.00 21 2119 0 0 0 0 11
3J0L_7 - -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 506 13 3 10 0 10
3SN2_B 0.95 0.92 1.00 11 143 0 0 0 0 1
3U4M_B - 0.49 0.55 0.46 12 1250 14 3 11 0 10
3VJR_D - 1.00 1.00 1.00 12 239 0 0 0 0 0
4A1C_2 0.30 0.40 0.24 8 4482 35 13 13 9 12
4A4U_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 96 0 0 0 0 0
4ENB_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 461 0 0 0 0 4

^top


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