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 ContextFold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric ContextFold McQFold
MCC 0.810 > 0.662
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.811 ± 0.109 > 0.733 ± 0.129
Sensitivity 0.773 > 0.661
Positive Predictive Value 0.856 > 0.675
Total TP 333 > 285
Total TN 23845 > 23812
Total FP 103 < 176
Total FP CONTRA 9 < 39
Total FP INCONS 47 < 98
Total FP COMP 47 > 39
Total FN 98 < 146
P-value 5.19332990918e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of ContextFold and McQFold. 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 ContextFold and McQFold).

  2. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for ContextFold and McQFold. 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 ContextFold and McQFold).

^top





Performance of ContextFold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for ContextFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 333
Total TN 23845
Total FP 103
Total FP CONTRA 9
Total FP INCONS 47
Total FP COMP 47
Total FN 98
Total Scores
MCC 0.810
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.811 ± 0.109
Sensitivity 0.773
Positive Predictive Value 0.856
Nr of predictions 29

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.58 0.56 0.63 10 512 6 0 6 0 8
2LDL_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 131 0 0 0 0 0
2LHP_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 15 246 0 0 0 0 0
2LJJ_A - 0.92 0.86 1.00 6 124 3 0 0 3 1
2LK3_A - 0.94 0.89 1.00 8 92 0 0 0 0 1
2LKR_A - 0.70 0.66 0.76 19 2415 12 0 6 6 10
2LQZ_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 8 124 1 0 0 1 0
2LWK_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 11 196 1 0 0 1 0
3J0L_2 - 0.80 0.77 0.83 20 2226 11 0 4 7 6
3J0L_8 - 1.00 1.00 1.00 7 69 0 0 0 0 0
3J0L_h - 0.95 0.91 1.00 29 2111 2 0 0 2 3
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 3 0 2 1 2
3J0L_a - 0.80 0.73 0.89 8 402 2 0 1 1 3
3J0L_1 - 0.75 0.69 0.82 9 473 5 0 2 3 4
3J16_L 0.90 0.81 1.00 17 1142 0 0 0 0 4
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 - 0.98 0.95 1.00 21 1255 0 0 0 0 1
3UZL_B 0.93 0.88 1.00 14 1279 7 0 0 7 2
3VJR_D - 1.00 1.00 1.00 12 239 0 0 0 0 0
4A1C_3 0.96 0.92 1.00 34 2729 1 0 0 1 3
4A1C_2 0.26 0.25 0.28 5 4498 26 3 10 13 15
4A4U_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 96 0 0 0 0 0
4AOB_A 0.62 0.59 0.68 17 1412 9 2 6 1 12
4ENB_A 0.77 0.60 1.00 9 463 0 0 0 0 6
4ENC_A 0.73 0.60 0.90 9 486 1 1 0 0 6

^top



Performance of McQFold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for McQFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 285
Total TN 23812
Total FP 176
Total FP CONTRA 39
Total FP INCONS 98
Total FP COMP 39
Total FN 146
Total Scores
MCC 0.662
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.733 ± 0.129
Sensitivity 0.661
Positive Predictive Value 0.675
Nr of predictions 29

^top



2. Individual counts for McQFold [ 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 5 1 4 0 7
2LDL_A - 0.81 0.67 1.00 6 134 0 0 0 0 3
2LHP_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 15 246 1 0 0 1 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 - 0.55 0.55 0.55 16 2411 15 5 8 2 13
2LQZ_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 8 124 3 0 0 3 0
2LWK_A - 0.95 0.91 1.00 10 197 2 0 0 2 1
3J0L_2 - 0.29 0.31 0.30 8 2223 21 1 18 2 18
3J0L_8 - 1.00 1.00 1.00 7 69 0 0 0 0 0
3J0L_h - 0.75 0.66 0.88 21 2116 3 0 3 0 11
3J0L_7 - -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 509 10 2 8 0 10
3J0L_g - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 174 4 0 2 2 2
3J0L_a - 0.21 0.18 0.29 2 404 6 3 2 1 9
3J0L_1 - 0.73 0.62 0.89 8 475 4 0 1 3 5
3J16_L 0.90 0.81 1.00 17 1142 0 0 0 0 4
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 2 0 0 2 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 - 0.95 0.91 1.00 20 1256 2 0 0 2 2
3UZL_B 0.62 0.75 0.52 12 1270 17 8 3 6 4
3VJR_D - 1.00 1.00 1.00 12 239 0 0 0 0 0
4A1C_3 0.28 0.30 0.28 11 2724 30 4 24 2 26
4A1C_2 0.19 0.25 0.16 5 4484 33 11 16 6 15
4A4U_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 96 0 0 0 0 0
4AOB_A 0.50 0.48 0.54 14 1411 13 3 9 1 15
4ENB_A 1.00 1.00 1.00 15 457 0 0 0 0 0
4ENC_A 0.97 1.00 0.94 15 480 1 1 0 0 0

^top


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