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 MXScarna(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

  5. Compile and download dataset for MXScarna(20) & Cylofold [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric MXScarna(20) Cylofold
MCC 0.804 > 0.703
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.765 ± 0.108 > 0.728 ± 0.162
Sensitivity 0.757 > 0.703
Positive Predictive Value 0.859 > 0.711
Total TP 268 > 249
Total TN 26013 > 25975
Total FP 91 < 136
Total FP CONTRA 15 < 31
Total FP INCONS 29 < 70
Total FP COMP 47 > 35
Total FN 86 < 105
P-value 2.9966815982e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of MXScarna(20) and Cylofold. 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 MXScarna(20) and Cylofold).

  2. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for MXScarna(20) and Cylofold. 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 MXScarna(20) and Cylofold).

^top





Performance of MXScarna(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for MXScarna(20)

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 268
Total TN 26013
Total FP 91
Total FP CONTRA 15
Total FP INCONS 29
Total FP COMP 47
Total FN 86
Total Scores
MCC 0.804
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.765 ± 0.108
Sensitivity 0.757
Positive Predictive Value 0.859
Nr of predictions 14

^top



2. Individual counts for MXScarna(20) [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2L94_A 0.73 0.72 0.76 13 340 5 0 4 1 5
2XKV_B 0.60 0.36 1.00 4 1831 3 0 0 3 7
2XQD_Y 0.98 0.95 1.00 20 1109 1 0 0 1 1
2XXA_G 0.88 0.86 0.91 30 2012 4 0 3 1 5
3AMU_B 1.00 1.00 1.00 19 1138 3 0 0 3 0
3IZF_C 0.87 0.89 0.86 31 2604 12 0 5 7 4
3O58_2 0.92 0.90 0.93 28 2724 13 0 2 11 3
3O58_3 0.62 0.59 0.65 13 4744 18 5 2 11 9
3PDR_A 0.85 0.82 0.89 41 4794 9 2 3 4 9
3RKF_A 0.86 0.75 1.00 18 848 0 0 0 0 6
3SD1_A 0.74 0.76 0.73 22 1503 9 6 2 1 7
4AOB_A 0.68 0.69 0.69 20 1408 13 2 7 4 9
4ENB_A 0.29 0.13 0.67 2 469 1 0 1 0 13
4ENC_A 0.68 0.47 1.00 7 489 0 0 0 0 8

^top



Performance of Cylofold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Cylofold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 249
Total TN 25975
Total FP 136
Total FP CONTRA 31
Total FP INCONS 70
Total FP COMP 35
Total FN 105
Total Scores
MCC 0.703
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.728 ± 0.162
Sensitivity 0.703
Positive Predictive Value 0.711
Nr of predictions 14

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2L94_A 1.00 1.00 1.00 18 339 1 0 0 1 0
2XKV_B 0.41 0.55 0.32 6 1816 25 9 4 12 5
2XQD_Y 0.89 0.95 0.83 20 1105 5 4 0 1 1
2XXA_G 0.10 0.11 0.11 4 2009 32 2 30 0 31
3AMU_B 0.77 0.79 0.75 15 1137 8 0 5 3 4
3IZF_C 0.85 0.83 0.88 29 2607 7 0 4 3 6
3O58_2 0.90 0.84 0.96 26 2727 3 0 1 2 5
3O58_3 0.42 0.50 0.35 11 4733 30 9 11 10 11
3PDR_A 0.86 0.78 0.95 39 4799 4 1 1 2 11
3RKF_A 0.91 0.83 1.00 20 846 0 0 0 0 4
3SD1_A 0.71 0.69 0.74 20 1506 7 2 5 0 9
4AOB_A 0.42 0.38 0.48 11 1414 13 3 9 1 18
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.