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 CentroidAlifold(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric CentroidAlifold(20) Cylofold
MCC 0.703 > 0.608
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.682 ± 0.079 > 0.640 ± 0.145
Sensitivity 0.536 > 0.523
Positive Predictive Value 0.926 > 0.712
Total TP 263 > 257
Total TN 68815 > 68738
Total FP 36 < 128
Total FP CONTRA 2 < 19
Total FP INCONS 19 < 85
Total FP COMP 15 < 24
Total FN 228 < 234
P-value 2.69132796717e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of CentroidAlifold(20) and Cylofold. 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 CentroidAlifold(20) and Cylofold).

  2. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for CentroidAlifold(20) and Cylofold. 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 CentroidAlifold(20) and Cylofold).

^top





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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 263
Total TN 68815
Total FP 36
Total FP CONTRA 2
Total FP INCONS 19
Total FP COMP 15
Total FN 228
Total Scores
MCC 0.703
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.682 ± 0.079
Sensitivity 0.536
Positive Predictive Value 0.926
Nr of predictions 14

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2L94_A 0.61 0.55 0.69 11 974 5 0 5 0 9
2XKV_B 0.46 0.25 0.83 5 4554 6 0 1 5 15
2XQD_Y 0.88 0.78 1.00 21 2829 0 0 0 0 6
2XXA_G 0.44 0.19 1.00 8 5143 3 0 0 3 34
3AMU_B 0.86 0.74 1.00 20 2983 1 0 0 1 7
3IZF_C 0.75 0.61 0.92 33 6867 4 0 3 1 21
3O58_2 0.78 0.76 0.81 29 7224 9 2 5 2 9
3O58_3 0.54 0.31 0.92 11 12391 1 0 1 0 24
3PDR_A 0.76 0.63 0.94 45 12832 5 0 3 2 27
3RKF_A 0.72 0.53 1.00 18 2193 0 0 0 0 16
3SD1_A 0.71 0.52 0.96 22 3893 1 0 1 0 20
4AOB_A 0.75 0.57 1.00 24 4347 1 0 0 1 18
4ENB_A 0.69 0.47 1.00 9 1266 0 0 0 0 10
4ENC_A 0.60 0.37 1.00 7 1319 0 0 0 0 12

^top



Performance of Cylofold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Cylofold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 257
Total TN 68738
Total FP 128
Total FP CONTRA 19
Total FP INCONS 85
Total FP COMP 24
Total FN 234
Total Scores
MCC 0.608
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.640 ± 0.145
Sensitivity 0.523
Positive Predictive Value 0.712
Nr of predictions 14

^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
2L94_A 0.97 0.95 1.00 19 971 0 0 0 0 1
2XKV_B 0.38 0.40 0.36 8 4538 23 7 7 9 12
2XQD_Y 0.81 0.78 0.84 21 2825 4 4 0 0 6
2XXA_G 0.10 0.10 0.11 4 5115 32 1 31 0 38
3AMU_B 0.67 0.59 0.76 16 2982 7 0 5 2 11
3IZF_C 0.68 0.56 0.83 30 6867 6 0 6 0 24
3O58_2 0.80 0.68 0.93 26 7232 3 0 2 1 12
3O58_3 0.36 0.34 0.38 12 12371 29 5 15 9 23
3PDR_A 0.72 0.54 0.95 39 12839 4 0 2 2 33
3RKF_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2191 0 0 0 0 14
3SD1_A 0.62 0.50 0.78 21 3889 6 0 6 0 21
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.