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 RNASampler(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric RNASampler(20) Contrafold
MCC 0.765 > 0.656
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.787 ± 0.078 > 0.674 ± 0.112
Sensitivity 0.671 < 0.675
Positive Predictive Value 0.875 > 0.643
Total TP 492 < 495
Total TN 77577 > 77369
Total FP 167 < 387
Total FP CONTRA 34 < 95
Total FP INCONS 36 < 180
Total FP COMP 97 < 112
Total FN 241 > 238
P-value 5.10776592382e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of RNASampler(20) and Contrafold. 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 RNASampler(20) and Contrafold).

  2. Average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCC) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were plotted for different RNA families, for which at least 3 members were present in the benchmarking dataset. 'n' denotes the number of MCCs used to calculate the average and CI. See tables below for raw data (individual counts for RNASampler(20) and Contrafold).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for RNASampler(20) and Contrafold. 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 RNASampler(20) and Contrafold).

^top





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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 492
Total TN 77577
Total FP 167
Total FP CONTRA 34
Total FP INCONS 36
Total FP COMP 97
Total FN 241
Total Scores
MCC 0.765
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.787 ± 0.078
Sensitivity 0.671
Positive Predictive Value 0.875
Nr of predictions 28

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KDQ_B 1.00 1.00 1.00 10 164 0 0 0 0 0
2L94_A 0.94 0.94 0.94 17 339 2 0 1 1 1
2WRQ_Y 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 1143 14 0 0 14 0
2XKV_B 0.60 0.36 1.00 4 1831 2 0 0 2 7
2XQD_Y 0.98 0.95 1.00 20 1109 1 0 0 1 1
2XXA_G 0.34 0.11 1.00 4 2041 0 0 0 0 31
3A2K_C 0.98 0.95 1.00 21 1087 0 0 0 0 1
3AMU_B 0.95 0.95 0.95 18 1138 4 0 1 3 1
3G4S_9 0.73 0.54 1.00 14 2722 4 0 0 4 12
3GX2_A 0.88 0.79 1.00 22 1427 1 0 0 1 6
3IVN_B 0.91 0.83 1.00 19 884 0 0 0 0 4
3IZ4_A 0.52 0.41 0.65 39 25476 26 15 6 5 56
3IZF_C 0.92 0.86 1.00 30 2610 2 0 0 2 5
3JYV_7 0.97 0.95 1.00 19 1092 2 0 0 2 1
3JYX_3 0.70 0.60 0.82 9 2367 14 0 2 12 6
3JYX_4 0.61 0.83 0.45 10 4734 26 10 2 14 2
3LA5_A 0.89 0.80 1.00 20 934 0 0 0 0 5
3NPB_A 0.75 0.57 1.00 21 2257 5 0 0 5 16
3O58_2 0.93 0.87 1.00 27 2727 5 0 0 5 4
3O58_3 0.51 0.50 0.52 11 4743 19 5 5 9 11
3PDR_A 0.84 0.76 0.93 38 4799 5 1 2 2 12
3RKF_A 0.91 0.83 1.00 20 846 0 0 0 0 4
3SD1_A 0.81 0.69 0.95 20 1512 1 0 1 0 9
4A1C_3 0.90 0.81 1.00 30 2733 0 0 0 0 7
4A1C_2 0.24 0.25 0.24 5 4495 30 3 13 14 15
4AOB_A 0.70 0.59 0.85 17 1417 4 0 3 1 12
4ENB_A 0.68 0.47 1.00 7 465 0 0 0 0 8
4ENC_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 485 0 0 0 0 4

^top



Performance of Contrafold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Contrafold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 495
Total TN 77369
Total FP 387
Total FP CONTRA 95
Total FP INCONS 180
Total FP COMP 112
Total FN 238
Total Scores
MCC 0.656
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.674 ± 0.112
Sensitivity 0.675
Positive Predictive Value 0.643
Nr of predictions 28

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KDQ_B 1.00 1.00 1.00 10 164 0 0 0 0 0
2L94_A 0.94 0.94 0.94 17 339 2 0 1 1 1
2WRQ_Y 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 1143 14 0 0 14 0
2XKV_B 0.64 0.73 0.57 8 1821 27 0 6 21 3
2XQD_Y 0.85 0.86 0.86 18 1108 4 0 3 1 3
2XXA_G 0.10 0.11 0.12 4 2012 30 2 27 1 31
3A2K_C 0.49 0.55 0.46 12 1082 14 3 11 0 10
3AMU_B 0.75 0.79 0.71 15 1136 9 0 6 3 4
3G4S_9 0.45 0.50 0.42 13 2705 24 6 12 6 13
3GX2_A 0.93 0.89 0.96 25 1423 2 1 0 1 3
3IVN_B 0.91 0.83 1.00 19 884 0 0 0 0 4
3IZ4_A 0.57 0.58 0.57 55 25440 49 18 23 8 40
3IZF_C 0.89 0.91 0.86 32 2603 11 0 5 6 3
3JYV_7 -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 1091 20 4 16 0 20
3JYX_3 0.33 0.47 0.24 7 2349 24 16 6 2 8
3JYX_4 0.39 0.58 0.27 7 4730 35 13 6 16 5
3LA5_A 0.91 0.84 1.00 21 933 0 0 0 0 4
3NPB_A 0.86 0.84 0.89 31 2243 9 1 3 5 6
3O58_2 0.92 0.94 0.91 29 2722 10 0 3 7 2
3O58_3 0.32 0.36 0.29 8 4736 21 7 13 1 14
3PDR_A 0.83 0.86 0.80 43 4786 13 5 6 2 7
3RKF_A 0.87 0.83 0.91 20 844 2 2 0 0 4
3SD1_A 0.68 0.69 0.69 20 1504 9 5 4 0 9
4A1C_3 0.81 0.81 0.81 30 2726 10 0 7 3 7
4A1C_2 0.21 0.25 0.19 5 4489 33 9 13 11 15
4AOB_A 0.53 0.52 0.56 15 1410 13 3 9 1 14
4ENB_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 461 1 0 0 1 4
4ENC_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 485 1 0 0 1 4

^top


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