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 IPknot - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric IPknot MCFold
MCC 0.792 > 0.668
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.797 ± 0.101 > 0.649 ± 0.130
Sensitivity 0.763 > 0.698
Positive Predictive Value 0.831 > 0.652
Total TP 397 > 363
Total TN 26431 > 26352
Total FP 127 < 274
Total FP CONTRA 19 < 42
Total FP INCONS 62 < 152
Total FP COMP 46 < 80
Total FN 123 < 157
P-value 3.56938820447e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of IPknot and MCFold. 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 IPknot and MCFold).

  2. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for IPknot and MCFold. 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 IPknot and MCFold).

^top





Performance of IPknot - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for IPknot

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 397
Total TN 26431
Total FP 127
Total FP CONTRA 19
Total FP INCONS 62
Total FP COMP 46
Total FN 123
Total Scores
MCC 0.792
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.797 ± 0.101
Sensitivity 0.763
Positive Predictive Value 0.831
Nr of predictions 36

^top



2. Individual counts for IPknot [ 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 0.41 0.33 0.55 6 517 5 1 4 0 12
2LDL_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 131 0 0 0 0 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
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 - 0.88 0.86 0.89 25 2412 9 0 3 6 4
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
2YIE_Z - 0.53 0.63 0.45 5 591 6 4 2 0 3
2YIE_X - 1.00 1.00 1.00 7 537 3 0 0 3 0
3AMU_B 0.81 0.79 0.83 15 1139 6 0 3 3 4
3J0L_g - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 174 4 0 2 2 2
3J0L_8 - 1.00 1.00 1.00 7 69 0 0 0 0 0
3J0L_a - 0.16 0.18 0.18 2 400 10 3 6 1 9
3J0L_1 - 0.83 0.77 0.91 10 473 4 0 1 3 3
3J0L_h - 0.90 0.81 1.00 26 2114 2 0 0 2 6
3J0L_7 - -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 512 7 1 6 0 10
3J0L_2 - 0.49 0.46 0.52 12 2227 18 0 11 7 14
3J16_L 0.90 0.81 1.00 17 1142 0 0 0 0 4
3RKF_A 0.91 0.83 1.00 20 846 0 0 0 0 4
3SD1_A 0.74 0.69 0.80 20 1508 5 0 5 0 9
3SIU_F - 0.86 0.75 1.00 6 139 0 0 0 0 2
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 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 - 0.91 0.91 0.91 20 1254 3 2 0 1 2
3VJR_D - 1.00 1.00 1.00 12 239 0 0 0 0 0
4A1C_3 0.83 0.81 0.86 30 2728 7 0 5 2 7
4A1C_2 0.23 0.25 0.22 5 4493 26 8 10 8 15
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
4ENC_A 0.59 0.53 0.67 8 484 4 0 4 0 7

^top



Performance of MCFold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for MCFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 363
Total TN 26352
Total FP 274
Total FP CONTRA 42
Total FP INCONS 152
Total FP COMP 80
Total FN 157
Total Scores
MCC 0.668
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.649 ± 0.130
Sensitivity 0.698
Positive Predictive Value 0.652
Nr of predictions 36

^top



2. Individual counts for MCFold [ 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 1 0 0 1 0
2LC8_A 0.44 0.44 0.47 8 511 10 0 9 1 10
2LDL_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 131 1 0 0 1 0
2LDT_A - 0.95 0.91 1.00 10 152 0 0 0 0 1
2LHP_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 15 246 1 0 0 1 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 11 0 0 11 0
2LQZ_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 8 124 3 0 0 3 0
2LWK_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 11 196 2 0 0 2 0
2YIE_Z - 0.53 0.63 0.45 5 591 8 2 4 2 3
2YIE_X - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 535 15 1 8 6 7
3AMU_B 0.50 0.58 0.44 11 1132 15 4 10 1 8
3J0L_g - -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 170 7 4 2 1 2
3J0L_8 - 1.00 1.00 1.00 7 69 0 0 0 0 0
3J0L_a - 0.14 0.18 0.15 2 398 13 1 10 2 9
3J0L_1 - 0.88 0.85 0.92 11 472 5 0 1 4 2
3J0L_h - 0.98 0.97 1.00 31 2109 2 0 0 2 1
3J0L_7 - -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 504 15 6 9 0 10
3J0L_2 - 0.25 0.27 0.25 7 2222 29 4 17 8 19
3J16_L 0.54 0.57 0.52 12 1136 12 4 7 1 9
3RKF_A 0.89 0.88 0.91 21 843 3 0 2 1 3
3SD1_A 0.43 0.45 0.43 13 1503 17 1 16 0 16
3SIU_F - 0.53 0.63 0.50 5 135 5 2 3 0 3
3SN2_B 0.58 0.58 0.64 7 143 4 0 4 0 5
3TRZ_Z - -0.05 0.00 0.00 0 88 4 0 4 0 5
3TS0_U - 1.00 1.00 1.00 6 112 1 0 0 1 0
3TS2_V - -0.05 0.00 0.00 0 102 7 0 6 1 5
3U4M_B - 0.74 0.77 0.71 17 1252 10 1 6 3 5
3VJR_D - 1.00 1.00 1.00 12 239 1 0 0 1 0
4A1C_3 0.86 0.86 0.86 32 2726 9 0 5 4 5
4A1C_2 0.18 0.25 0.14 5 4480 45 12 19 14 15
4A4U_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 96 0 0 0 0 0
4ENB_A 0.78 0.73 0.85 11 459 4 0 2 2 4
4ENC_A 0.34 0.33 0.38 5 483 11 0 8 3 10

^top


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