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 UNAFold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric CentroidAlifold(20) UNAFold
MCC 0.680 > 0.585
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.670 ± 0.063 > 0.591 ± 0.086
Sensitivity 0.520 > 0.515
Positive Predictive Value 0.892 > 0.668
Total TP 519 > 514
Total TN 201737 > 201550
Total FP 102 < 333
Total FP CONTRA 13 < 33
Total FP INCONS 50 < 222
Total FP COMP 39 < 78
Total FN 479 < 484
P-value 5.1503931209e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

  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 CentroidAlifold(20) and UNAFold).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for CentroidAlifold(20) and UNAFold. 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 UNAFold).

^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 519
Total TN 201737
Total FP 102
Total FP CONTRA 13
Total FP INCONS 50
Total FP COMP 39
Total FN 479
Total Scores
MCC 0.680
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.670 ± 0.063
Sensitivity 0.520
Positive Predictive Value 0.892
Nr of predictions 26

^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
2WRQ_Y 0.57 0.59 0.56 10 2832 11 5 3 3 7
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
3A2K_C 0.86 0.75 1.00 21 2905 0 0 0 0 7
3AMU_B 0.86 0.74 1.00 20 2983 1 0 0 1 7
3GX2_A 0.77 0.60 1.00 24 4347 1 0 0 1 16
3IVN_B 0.78 0.65 0.95 20 2325 1 1 0 0 11
3IZ4_A 0.58 0.39 0.88 51 70818 7 3 4 0 81
3IZF_C 0.75 0.61 0.92 33 6867 4 0 3 1 21
3JYV_7 0.81 0.66 1.00 21 2829 0 0 0 0 11
3JYX_3 0.61 0.56 0.68 15 6306 20 0 7 13 12
3JYX_4 0.39 0.27 0.56 9 12230 9 0 7 2 24
3LA5_A 0.78 0.62 1.00 21 2464 0 0 0 0 13
3NPB_A 0.70 0.54 0.89 25 6993 5 1 2 2 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
4A1C_2 0.26 0.15 0.45 5 11770 8 1 5 2 28
4A1C_3 0.76 0.63 0.92 34 7103 4 0 3 1 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 UNAFold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for UNAFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 514
Total TN 201550
Total FP 333
Total FP CONTRA 33
Total FP INCONS 222
Total FP COMP 78
Total FN 484
Total Scores
MCC 0.585
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.591 ± 0.086
Sensitivity 0.515
Positive Predictive Value 0.668
Nr of predictions 26

^top



2. Individual counts for UNAFold [ 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
2WRQ_Y 0.57 0.59 0.56 10 2832 13 5 3 5 7
2XKV_B 0.47 0.45 0.50 9 4542 21 0 9 12 11
2XQD_Y 0.88 0.78 1.00 21 2829 0 0 0 0 6
2XXA_G 0.34 0.31 0.39 13 5118 20 1 19 0 29
3A2K_C 0.42 0.39 0.46 11 2902 13 2 11 0 17
3AMU_B 0.70 0.59 0.84 16 2984 5 0 3 2 11
3GX2_A 0.68 0.55 0.85 22 4345 5 0 4 1 18
3IVN_B 0.78 0.61 1.00 19 2327 0 0 0 0 12
3IZ4_A 0.51 0.45 0.58 60 70772 50 4 40 6 72
3IZF_C 0.70 0.61 0.80 33 6862 8 1 7 0 21
3JYV_7 0.22 0.19 0.29 6 2829 15 0 15 0 26
3JYX_3 0.62 0.63 0.61 17 6300 22 1 10 11 10
3JYX_4 0.32 0.30 0.34 10 12217 31 3 16 12 23
3LA5_A 0.78 0.62 1.00 21 2464 0 0 0 0 13
3NPB_A 0.78 0.65 0.94 30 6989 5 0 2 3 16
3O58_2 0.71 0.71 0.71 27 7222 12 4 7 1 11
3O58_3 0.35 0.34 0.35 12 12369 33 1 21 11 23
3PDR_A 0.77 0.64 0.94 46 12831 5 0 3 2 26
3RKF_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2191 0 0 0 0 14
3SD1_A 0.64 0.52 0.79 22 3888 6 1 5 0 20
4A1C_2 0.14 0.15 0.14 5 11745 42 5 26 11 28
4A1C_3 0.70 0.59 0.82 32 7101 7 1 6 0 22
4AOB_A 0.50 0.40 0.63 17 4344 11 2 8 1 25
4ENB_A 0.70 0.58 0.85 11 1262 2 1 1 0 8
4ENC_A 0.32 0.26 0.42 5 1314 7 1 6 0 14

^top


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