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 CRWrnafold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric CRWrnafold Fold
MCC 0.683 > 0.662
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.709 ± 0.130 > 0.674 ± 0.136
Sensitivity 0.690 > 0.674
Positive Predictive Value 0.689 > 0.663
Total TP 336 > 328
Total TN 26259 > 26252
Total FP 203 < 220
Total FP CONTRA 42 > 39
Total FP INCONS 110 < 128
Total FP COMP 51 < 53
Total FN 151 < 159
P-value 3.85233844192e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of CRWrnafold and Fold. 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 CRWrnafold and Fold).

  2. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for CRWrnafold and Fold. 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 CRWrnafold and Fold).

^top





Performance of CRWrnafold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for CRWrnafold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 336
Total TN 26259
Total FP 203
Total FP CONTRA 42
Total FP INCONS 110
Total FP COMP 51
Total FN 151
Total Scores
MCC 0.683
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.709 ± 0.130
Sensitivity 0.690
Positive Predictive Value 0.689
Nr of predictions 32

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LBS_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 14 193 0 0 0 0 0
2LC8_A -0.03 0.00 0.00 0 513 15 3 12 0 18
2LDL_A - 0.94 0.89 1.00 8 132 1 0 0 1 1
2LDT_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 11 151 0 0 0 0 0
2LHP_A - 0.96 0.93 1.00 14 247 0 0 0 0 1
2LI4_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 14 175 0 0 0 0 0
2LK3_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 91 0 0 0 0 0
2LKR_A - 0.58 0.55 0.62 16 2414 13 4 6 3 13
2LQZ_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 8 124 2 0 0 2 0
2YIE_Z - -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 587 15 6 9 0 8
2YIE_X - 0.53 0.57 0.50 4 536 9 1 3 5 3
3AMU_B 0.77 0.79 0.75 15 1137 8 0 5 3 4
3J0L_7 - -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 506 13 3 10 0 10
3J0L_g - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 174 4 0 2 2 2
3J0L_2 - 0.31 0.31 0.33 8 2226 23 1 15 7 18
3J0L_h - 0.93 0.88 1.00 28 2112 0 0 0 0 4
3J0L_a - 0.39 0.36 0.44 4 402 6 3 2 1 7
3J0L_8 - 1.00 1.00 1.00 7 69 0 0 0 0 0
3J0L_1 - 0.83 0.77 0.91 10 473 5 0 1 4 3
3J16_L 1.00 1.00 1.00 21 1138 0 0 0 0 0
3SD1_A 0.63 0.66 0.61 19 1502 12 6 6 0 10
3SN2_B 0.95 0.92 1.00 11 143 0 0 0 0 1
3TRZ_Z - 1.00 1.00 1.00 5 87 0 0 0 0 0
3TS0_U - 1.00 1.00 1.00 6 112 0 0 0 0 0
3TS2_V - 1.00 1.00 1.00 5 103 0 0 0 0 0
3U4M_B - 0.49 0.55 0.46 12 1250 14 3 11 0 10
4A1C_3 0.85 0.84 0.86 31 2727 7 0 5 2 6
4A1C_2 0.19 0.25 0.15 5 4483 44 8 20 16 15
4A4U_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 96 0 0 0 0 0
4AOB_A 0.71 0.69 0.74 20 1410 8 4 3 1 9
4ENB_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 461 2 0 0 2 4
4ENC_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 485 2 0 0 2 4

^top



Performance of Fold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Fold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 328
Total TN 26252
Total FP 220
Total FP CONTRA 39
Total FP INCONS 128
Total FP COMP 53
Total FN 159
Total Scores
MCC 0.662
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.674 ± 0.136
Sensitivity 0.674
Positive Predictive Value 0.663
Nr of predictions 32

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LBS_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 14 193 0 0 0 0 0
2LC8_A -0.03 0.00 0.00 0 513 15 3 12 0 18
2LDL_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 131 1 0 0 1 0
2LDT_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 11 151 0 0 0 0 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
2LK3_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 91 0 0 0 0 0
2LKR_A - 0.90 0.90 0.90 26 2411 10 0 3 7 3
2LQZ_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 8 124 2 0 0 2 0
2YIE_Z - -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 587 15 6 9 0 8
2YIE_X - 0.39 0.43 0.38 3 536 8 1 4 3 4
3AMU_B 0.73 0.79 0.68 15 1135 10 0 7 3 4
3J0L_7 - -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 507 12 2 10 0 10
3J0L_g - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 174 4 0 2 2 2
3J0L_2 - 0.30 0.31 0.31 8 2224 25 2 16 7 18
3J0L_h - 0.93 0.88 1.00 28 2112 2 0 0 2 4
3J0L_a - 0.15 0.18 0.17 2 399 11 4 6 1 9
3J0L_8 - 1.00 1.00 1.00 7 69 0 0 0 0 0
3J0L_1 - 0.83 0.77 0.91 10 473 4 0 1 3 3
3J16_L 0.76 0.76 0.76 16 1138 5 0 5 0 5
3SD1_A 0.68 0.69 0.69 20 1504 9 4 5 0 9
3SN2_B 1.00 1.00 1.00 12 142 0 0 0 0 0
3TRZ_Z - 1.00 1.00 1.00 5 87 1 0 0 1 0
3TS0_U - 1.00 1.00 1.00 6 112 1 0 0 1 0
3TS2_V - 1.00 1.00 1.00 5 103 0 0 0 0 0
3U4M_B - 0.58 0.59 0.59 13 1254 9 2 7 0 9
4A1C_3 0.86 0.84 0.89 31 2728 7 0 4 3 6
4A1C_2 0.19 0.25 0.15 5 4482 43 11 18 14 15
4A4U_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 96 0 0 0 0 0
4AOB_A 0.60 0.59 0.63 17 1410 11 4 6 1 12
4ENB_A 0.37 0.33 0.45 5 461 7 0 6 1 10
4ENC_A 0.36 0.33 0.42 5 484 8 0 7 1 10

^top


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