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 RSpredict(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric RSpredict(20) McQFold
MCC 0.663 > 0.634
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.653 ± 0.116 < 0.680 ± 0.128
Sensitivity 0.593 < 0.646
Positive Predictive Value 0.748 > 0.629
Total TP 419 < 457
Total TN 74843 > 74677
Total FP 230 < 347
Total FP CONTRA 61 < 95
Total FP INCONS 80 < 174
Total FP COMP 89 > 78
Total FN 288 > 250
P-value 6.48688953717e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of RSpredict(20) and McQFold. 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 RSpredict(20) and McQFold).

  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 RSpredict(20) and McQFold).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for RSpredict(20) and McQFold. 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 RSpredict(20) and McQFold).

^top





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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 419
Total TN 74843
Total FP 230
Total FP CONTRA 61
Total FP INCONS 80
Total FP COMP 89
Total FN 288
Total Scores
MCC 0.663
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.653 ± 0.116
Sensitivity 0.593
Positive Predictive Value 0.748
Nr of predictions 27

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KDQ_B 0.89 0.80 1.00 8 166 0 0 0 0 2
2L94_A 0.53 0.50 0.60 9 342 7 0 6 1 9
2WRQ_Y 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 1143 12 0 0 12 0
2XKV_B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1831 4 1 3 0 11
2XQD_Y 0.98 0.95 1.00 20 1109 1 0 0 1 1
2XXA_G 0.50 0.26 1.00 9 2036 0 0 0 0 26
3A2K_C 0.88 0.86 0.90 19 1087 2 0 2 0 3
3AMU_B 0.69 0.53 0.91 10 1146 2 0 1 1 9
3GX2_A 0.40 0.21 0.75 6 1441 2 1 1 0 22
3IVN_B 0.91 0.87 0.95 20 882 1 1 0 0 3
3IZ4_A 0.61 0.57 0.67 54 25455 38 13 14 11 41
3IZF_C 0.94 0.91 0.97 32 2607 4 0 1 3 3
3JYV_7 0.97 0.95 1.00 19 1092 2 0 0 2 1
3JYX_3 0.80 0.80 0.80 12 2363 16 0 3 13 3
3JYX_4 0.59 0.75 0.47 9 4737 33 9 1 23 3
3LA5_A 0.89 0.80 1.00 20 934 0 0 0 0 5
3NPB_A -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 2272 6 1 5 0 37
3O58_2 0.93 0.94 0.94 29 2723 10 0 2 8 2
3O58_3 0.38 0.50 0.30 11 4727 29 15 11 3 11
3PDR_A 0.80 0.70 0.92 35 4802 5 1 2 2 15
3RKF_A 0.91 0.88 0.95 21 844 1 1 0 0 3
3SD1_A 0.82 0.86 0.78 25 1501 7 5 2 0 4
4A1C_2 0.25 0.30 0.21 6 4487 30 12 11 7 14
4A1C_3 0.60 0.49 0.75 18 2739 8 0 6 2 19
4AOB_A 0.33 0.21 0.55 6 1426 5 1 4 0 23
4ENB_A 0.54 0.40 0.75 6 464 2 0 2 0 9
4ENC_A 0.51 0.40 0.67 6 487 3 0 3 0 9

^top



Performance of McQFold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for McQFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 457
Total TN 74677
Total FP 347
Total FP CONTRA 95
Total FP INCONS 174
Total FP COMP 78
Total FN 250
Total Scores
MCC 0.634
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.680 ± 0.128
Sensitivity 0.646
Positive Predictive Value 0.629
Nr of predictions 27

^top



2. Individual counts for McQFold [ 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 18 339 1 0 0 1 0
2WRQ_Y 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 1143 14 0 0 14 0
2XKV_B 0.33 0.36 0.31 4 1822 27 2 7 18 7
2XQD_Y 0.98 0.95 1.00 20 1109 1 0 0 1 1
2XXA_G 0.27 0.26 0.30 9 2015 22 0 21 1 26
3A2K_C 0.98 0.95 1.00 21 1087 0 0 0 0 1
3AMU_B 0.86 0.79 0.94 15 1141 4 0 1 3 4
3GX2_A 0.56 0.57 0.57 16 1421 13 4 8 1 12
3IVN_B 0.91 0.83 1.00 19 884 0 0 0 0 4
3IZ4_A 0.46 0.46 0.47 44 25442 56 14 36 6 51
3IZF_C 0.85 0.83 0.88 29 2607 7 0 4 3 6
3JYV_7 -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 1091 20 4 16 0 20
3JYX_3 0.28 0.40 0.20 6 2348 24 17 7 0 9
3JYX_4 0.35 0.58 0.22 7 4724 33 17 8 8 5
3LA5_A 0.91 0.84 1.00 21 933 0 0 0 0 4
3NPB_A 0.90 0.81 1.00 30 2248 5 0 0 5 7
3O58_2 0.93 0.87 1.00 27 2727 2 0 0 2 4
3O58_3 0.30 0.36 0.25 8 4732 27 15 9 3 14
3PDR_A 0.83 0.80 0.87 40 4794 9 2 4 3 10
3RKF_A 0.91 0.83 1.00 20 846 0 0 0 0 4
3SD1_A 0.82 0.83 0.83 24 1504 5 1 4 0 5
4A1C_2 0.19 0.25 0.16 5 4484 33 11 16 6 15
4A1C_3 0.28 0.30 0.28 11 2724 30 4 24 2 26
4AOB_A 0.50 0.48 0.54 14 1411 13 3 9 1 15
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.