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 MCFold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric MCFold RNAwolf
MCC 0.668 > 0.602
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.649 ± 0.130 > 0.639 ± 0.125
Sensitivity 0.698 > 0.594
Positive Predictive Value 0.652 > 0.624
Total TP 363 > 309
Total TN 26352 < 26414
Total FP 274 > 242
Total FP CONTRA 42 > 35
Total FP INCONS 152 > 151
Total FP COMP 80 > 56
Total FN 157 < 211
P-value 3.56938820447e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

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

^top





Performance of MCFold - scored higher 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



Performance of RNAwolf - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNAwolf

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 309
Total TN 26414
Total FP 242
Total FP CONTRA 35
Total FP INCONS 151
Total FP COMP 56
Total FN 211
Total Scores
MCC 0.602
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.639 ± 0.125
Sensitivity 0.594
Positive Predictive Value 0.624
Nr of predictions 36

^top



2. Individual counts for RNAwolf [ 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 0.52 0.50 0.56 9 512 7 0 7 0 9
2LDL_A - 0.88 0.78 1.00 7 133 0 0 0 0 2
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 1 0 0 1 0
2LI4_A - 0.96 0.93 1.00 13 176 0 0 0 0 1
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 - 0.84 0.79 0.88 23 2414 11 0 3 8 6
2LQZ_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 8 124 1 0 0 1 0
2LWK_A - 0.48 0.45 0.56 5 198 5 0 4 1 6
2YIE_Z - 0.62 0.63 0.63 5 594 7 1 2 4 3
2YIE_X - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 536 11 1 7 3 7
3AMU_B 0.77 0.79 0.75 15 1137 8 0 5 3 4
3J0L_g - -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 171 7 4 1 2 2
3J0L_8 - 1.00 1.00 1.00 7 69 0 0 0 0 0
3J0L_a - 0.14 0.18 0.14 2 397 13 4 8 1 9
3J0L_1 - 0.68 0.54 0.88 7 476 5 0 1 4 6
3J0L_h - 0.47 0.41 0.57 13 2117 12 1 9 2 19
3J0L_7 - -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 509 10 1 9 0 10
3J0L_2 - 0.14 0.15 0.15 4 2223 26 4 19 3 22
3J16_L 0.58 0.57 0.60 12 1139 9 2 6 1 9
3RKF_A 0.89 0.83 0.95 20 845 1 0 1 0 4
3SD1_A 0.58 0.59 0.59 17 1504 12 2 10 0 12
3SIU_F - 0.86 0.75 1.00 6 139 0 0 0 0 2
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 0 0 0 0 0
3TS0_U - 1.00 1.00 1.00 6 112 1 0 0 1 0
3TS2_V - -0.05 0.00 0.00 0 103 6 0 5 1 5
3U4M_B - 0.50 0.50 0.52 11 1255 12 1 9 2 11
3VJR_D - 1.00 1.00 1.00 12 239 1 0 0 1 0
4A1C_3 0.32 0.30 0.35 11 2732 21 1 19 1 26
4A1C_2 0.12 0.15 0.10 3 4487 38 12 14 12 17
4A4U_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 96 0 0 0 0 0
4ENB_A 0.45 0.40 0.55 6 461 5 1 4 0 9
4ENC_A 0.34 0.33 0.38 5 483 9 0 8 1 10

^top


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