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 Sfold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric Sfold CRWrnafold
MCC 0.711 > 0.683
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.727 ± 0.119 > 0.709 ± 0.130
Sensitivity 0.692 > 0.690
Positive Predictive Value 0.741 > 0.689
Total TP 337 > 336
Total TN 26292 > 26259
Total FP 164 < 203
Total FP CONTRA 31 < 42
Total FP INCONS 87 < 110
Total FP COMP 46 < 51
Total FN 150 < 151
P-value 5.6410608252e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of Sfold and CRWrnafold. 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 Sfold and CRWrnafold).

  2. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for Sfold and CRWrnafold. 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 Sfold and CRWrnafold).

^top





Performance of Sfold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Sfold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 337
Total TN 26292
Total FP 164
Total FP CONTRA 31
Total FP INCONS 87
Total FP COMP 46
Total FN 150
Total Scores
MCC 0.711
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.727 ± 0.119
Sensitivity 0.692
Positive Predictive Value 0.741
Nr of predictions 32

^top



2. Individual counts for Sfold [ 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 0.46 0.39 0.58 7 516 5 0 5 0 11
2LDL_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 131 1 0 0 1 0
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 0 0 0 0 0
2LI4_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 14 175 0 0 0 0 0
2LK3_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 91 0 0 0 0 0
2LKR_A - 0.95 0.90 1.00 26 2414 6 0 0 6 3
2LQZ_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 8 124 2 0 0 2 0
2YIE_Z - -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 587 15 6 9 0 8
2YIE_X - 0.75 0.57 1.00 4 540 0 0 0 0 3
3AMU_B 0.81 0.79 0.83 15 1139 6 0 3 3 4
3J0L_7 - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 516 3 1 2 0 10
3J0L_g - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 173 5 1 2 2 2
3J0L_2 - 0.44 0.42 0.48 11 2227 19 0 12 7 15
3J0L_h - 0.87 0.81 0.93 26 2112 4 1 1 2 6
3J0L_a - 0.55 0.64 0.50 7 397 8 5 2 1 4
3J0L_8 - 1.00 1.00 1.00 7 69 0 0 0 0 0
3J0L_1 - 0.83 0.77 0.91 10 473 5 0 1 4 3
3J16_L 0.34 0.33 0.37 7 1140 12 0 12 0 14
3SD1_A 0.78 0.72 0.84 21 1508 4 2 2 0 8
3SN2_B 0.95 0.92 1.00 11 143 0 0 0 0 1
3TRZ_Z - 1.00 1.00 1.00 5 87 2 0 0 2 0
3TS0_U - 1.00 1.00 1.00 6 112 1 0 0 1 0
3TS2_V - 1.00 1.00 1.00 5 103 0 0 0 0 0
3U4M_B - 0.49 0.55 0.46 12 1250 14 3 11 0 10
4A1C_3 0.83 0.81 0.86 30 2728 7 0 5 2 7
4A1C_2 0.21 0.25 0.19 5 4489 34 8 14 12 15
4A4U_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 96 0 0 0 0 0
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 0 0 0 0 4
4ENC_A 0.57 0.33 1.00 5 491 0 0 0 0 10

^top



Performance of CRWrnafold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for CRWrnafold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 336
Total TN 26259
Total FP 203
Total FP CONTRA 42
Total FP INCONS 110
Total FP COMP 51
Total FN 151
Total Scores
MCC 0.683
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.709 ± 0.130
Sensitivity 0.690
Positive Predictive Value 0.689
Nr of predictions 32

^top



2. Individual counts for CRWrnafold [ 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 -0.03 0.00 0.00 0 513 15 3 12 0 18
2LDL_A - 0.94 0.89 1.00 8 132 1 0 0 1 1
2LDT_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 11 151 0 0 0 0 0
2LHP_A - 0.96 0.93 1.00 14 247 0 0 0 0 1
2LI4_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 14 175 0 0 0 0 0
2LK3_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 91 0 0 0 0 0
2LKR_A - 0.58 0.55 0.62 16 2414 13 4 6 3 13
2LQZ_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 8 124 2 0 0 2 0
2YIE_Z - -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 587 15 6 9 0 8
2YIE_X - 0.53 0.57 0.50 4 536 9 1 3 5 3
3AMU_B 0.77 0.79 0.75 15 1137 8 0 5 3 4
3J0L_7 - -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 506 13 3 10 0 10
3J0L_g - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 174 4 0 2 2 2
3J0L_2 - 0.31 0.31 0.33 8 2226 23 1 15 7 18
3J0L_h - 0.93 0.88 1.00 28 2112 0 0 0 0 4
3J0L_a - 0.39 0.36 0.44 4 402 6 3 2 1 7
3J0L_8 - 1.00 1.00 1.00 7 69 0 0 0 0 0
3J0L_1 - 0.83 0.77 0.91 10 473 5 0 1 4 3
3J16_L 1.00 1.00 1.00 21 1138 0 0 0 0 0
3SD1_A 0.63 0.66 0.61 19 1502 12 6 6 0 10
3SN2_B 0.95 0.92 1.00 11 143 0 0 0 0 1
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 0 0 0 0 0
3TS2_V - 1.00 1.00 1.00 5 103 0 0 0 0 0
3U4M_B - 0.49 0.55 0.46 12 1250 14 3 11 0 10
4A1C_3 0.85 0.84 0.86 31 2727 7 0 5 2 6
4A1C_2 0.19 0.25 0.15 5 4483 44 8 20 16 15
4A4U_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 96 0 0 0 0 0
4AOB_A 0.71 0.69 0.74 20 1410 8 4 3 1 9
4ENB_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 461 2 0 0 2 4
4ENC_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 485 2 0 0 2 4

^top


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