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 CRWrnafold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric CRWrnafold Cylofold
MCC 0.569 > 0.562
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.596 ± 0.141 < 0.599 ± 0.124
Sensitivity 0.497 > 0.482
Positive Predictive Value 0.660 < 0.665
Total TP 256 > 248
Total TN 49076 < 49091
Total FP 145 > 132
Total FP CONTRA 19 > 13
Total FP INCONS 113 > 112
Total FP COMP 13 > 7
Total FN 259 < 267
P-value 0.00683149332667

^top




Performance plots


^top





Performance of CRWrnafold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for CRWrnafold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 256
Total TN 49076
Total FP 145
Total FP CONTRA 19
Total FP INCONS 113
Total FP COMP 13
Total FN 259
Total Scores
MCC 0.569
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.596 ± 0.141
Sensitivity 0.497
Positive Predictive Value 0.660
Nr of predictions 25

^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
2LC8_A -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1525 15 2 13 0 20
2LDL_A - 0.85 0.73 1.00 8 343 1 0 0 1 3
2LDT_A - 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 454 0 0 0 0 4
2LI4_A - 0.93 0.88 1.00 14 482 0 0 0 0 2
2LK3_A - 0.95 0.90 1.00 9 267 0 0 0 0 1
2LKR_A - 0.52 0.44 0.63 17 6078 12 2 8 2 22
2YIE_X - 0.36 0.33 0.40 4 1368 9 2 4 3 8
2YIE_Z - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1525 15 3 12 0 12
3AMU_B 0.67 0.59 0.76 16 2982 7 0 5 2 11
3J0L_7 - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1212 13 0 13 0 17
3J0L_g - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 461 4 1 3 0 4
3J0L_h - 0.81 0.65 1.00 28 6077 0 0 0 0 15
3J0L_2 - 0.25 0.24 0.28 8 6187 23 2 19 2 25
3J0L_1 - 0.76 0.63 0.92 12 1212 3 0 1 2 7
3J0L_a - 0.39 0.31 0.50 5 1118 5 1 4 0 11
3J16_L 0.84 0.70 1.00 21 2754 0 0 0 0 9
3SD1_A 0.52 0.45 0.61 19 3885 12 2 10 0 23
3SN2_B 0.96 0.92 1.00 11 395 0 0 0 0 1
3TRZ_Z - 0.91 0.83 1.00 5 205 0 0 0 0 1
3TS2_V - 1.00 1.00 1.00 5 271 0 0 0 0 0
3U4M_B - 0.38 0.32 0.46 12 3134 14 0 14 0 25
4A4U_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 222 0 0 0 0 0
4AOB_A 0.59 0.48 0.74 20 4344 8 2 5 1 22
4ENB_A 0.70 0.58 0.85 11 1262 2 1 1 0 8
4ENC_A 0.70 0.58 0.85 11 1313 2 1 1 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 248
Total TN 49091
Total FP 132
Total FP CONTRA 13
Total FP INCONS 112
Total FP COMP 7
Total FN 267
Total Scores
MCC 0.562
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.599 ± 0.124
Sensitivity 0.482
Positive Predictive Value 0.665
Nr of predictions 25

^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
2LC8_A 0.61 0.55 0.69 11 1524 5 0 5 0 9
2LDL_A - 0.73 0.55 1.00 6 345 0 0 0 0 5
2LDT_A - 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 454 0 0 0 0 4
2LI4_A - 0.93 0.88 1.00 14 482 0 0 0 0 2
2LK3_A - 0.95 0.90 1.00 9 267 0 0 0 0 1
2LKR_A - 0.50 0.44 0.59 17 6076 12 2 10 0 22
2YIE_X - 0.30 0.33 0.29 4 1364 10 2 8 0 8
2YIE_Z - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1529 11 3 8 0 12
3AMU_B 0.67 0.59 0.76 16 2982 7 0 5 2 11
3J0L_7 - 0.30 0.29 0.33 5 1210 10 0 10 0 12
3J0L_g - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 461 4 1 3 0 4
3J0L_h - 0.48 0.37 0.62 16 6079 10 0 10 0 27
3J0L_2 - 0.39 0.36 0.43 12 6188 18 2 14 2 21
3J0L_1 - 0.65 0.47 0.90 9 1215 2 0 1 1 10
3J0L_a - 0.22 0.19 0.27 3 1117 8 1 7 0 13
3J16_L 0.75 0.57 1.00 17 2758 0 0 0 0 13
3SD1_A 0.62 0.50 0.78 21 3889 6 0 6 0 21
3SN2_B 0.64 0.42 1.00 5 401 0 0 0 0 7
3TRZ_Z - 0.91 0.83 1.00 5 205 1 0 0 1 1
3TS2_V - 1.00 1.00 1.00 5 271 0 0 0 0 0
3U4M_B - 0.38 0.32 0.46 12 3134 14 0 14 0 25
4A4U_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 222 0 0 0 0 0
4AOB_A 0.35 0.26 0.48 11 4348 13 1 11 1 31
4ENB_A 0.89 0.79 1.00 15 1260 0 0 0 0 4
4ENC_A 0.86 0.79 0.94 15 1310 1 1 0 0 4

^top


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