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 PETfold_pre2.0(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

  5. Compile and download dataset for PETfold_pre2.0(seed) & UNAFold [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric PETfold_pre2.0(seed) UNAFold
MCC 0.828 > 0.489
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.777 ± 0.178 > 0.457 ± 0.263
Sensitivity 0.772 > 0.497
Positive Predictive Value 0.892 > 0.494
Total TP 132 > 85
Total TN 12516 > 12492
Total FP 42 < 115
Total FP CONTRA 3 < 21
Total FP INCONS 13 < 66
Total FP COMP 26 < 28
Total FN 39 < 86
P-value 0.0

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of PETfold_pre2.0(seed) and UNAFold. 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 PETfold_pre2.0(seed) and UNAFold).

  2. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for PETfold_pre2.0(seed) and UNAFold. 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 PETfold_pre2.0(seed) and UNAFold).

^top





Performance of PETfold_pre2.0(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for PETfold_pre2.0(seed)

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 132
Total TN 12516
Total FP 42
Total FP CONTRA 3
Total FP INCONS 13
Total FP COMP 26
Total FN 39
Total Scores
MCC 0.828
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.777 ± 0.178
Sensitivity 0.772
Positive Predictive Value 0.892
Nr of predictions 8

^top



2. Individual counts for PETfold_pre2.0(seed) [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.41 0.33 0.55 6 517 5 0 5 0 12
3J16_L 1.00 1.00 1.00 21 1138 1 0 0 1 0
3UZL_B 0.93 0.88 1.00 14 1279 8 0 0 8 2
4A1C_3 1.00 1.00 1.00 37 2726 2 0 0 2 0
4A1C_2 0.79 0.75 0.83 15 4498 12 1 2 9 5
4AOB_A 0.85 0.79 0.92 23 1412 4 0 2 2 6
4ENB_A 0.61 0.53 0.73 8 461 5 1 2 2 7
4ENC_A 0.61 0.53 0.73 8 485 5 1 2 2 7

^top



Performance of UNAFold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for UNAFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 85
Total TN 12492
Total FP 115
Total FP CONTRA 21
Total FP INCONS 66
Total FP COMP 28
Total FN 86
Total Scores
MCC 0.489
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.457 ± 0.263
Sensitivity 0.497
Positive Predictive Value 0.494
Nr of predictions 8

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A -0.03 0.00 0.00 0 513 15 3 12 0 18
3J16_L 0.31 0.33 0.30 7 1136 16 3 13 0 14
3UZL_B 0.49 0.50 0.50 8 1277 15 0 8 7 8
4A1C_3 0.88 0.86 0.89 32 2727 7 0 4 3 5
4A1C_2 0.19 0.25 0.15 5 4483 42 11 17 14 15
4AOB_A 0.60 0.59 0.63 17 1410 11 4 6 1 12
4ENB_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 461 2 0 0 2 4
4ENC_A 0.37 0.33 0.45 5 485 7 0 6 1 10

^top


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