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 CentroidHomfold‑LAST - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

  5. Compile and download dataset for CentroidHomfold‑LAST & Afold [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric CentroidHomfold‑LAST Afold
MCC 0.670 > 0.664
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.719 ± 0.121 > 0.692 ± 0.142
Sensitivity 0.542 < 0.612
Positive Predictive Value 0.834 > 0.726
Total TP 246 < 278
Total TN 43898 > 43810
Total FP 64 < 133
Total FP CONTRA 6 < 14
Total FP INCONS 43 < 91
Total FP COMP 15 < 28
Total FN 208 > 176
P-value 0.369701004532

^top




Performance plots


^top





Performance of CentroidHomfold‑LAST - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for CentroidHomfold‑LAST

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 246
Total TN 43898
Total FP 64
Total FP CONTRA 6
Total FP INCONS 43
Total FP COMP 15
Total FN 208
Total Scores
MCC 0.670
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.719 ± 0.121
Sensitivity 0.542
Positive Predictive Value 0.834
Nr of predictions 25

^top



2. Individual counts for CentroidHomfold‑LAST [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2L94_A 0.92 0.90 0.95 18 971 1 0 1 0 2
2LBS_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 14 482 0 0 0 0 0
2LC8_A -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1529 11 0 11 0 20
2LDL_A - 0.90 0.82 1.00 9 342 1 0 0 1 2
2LDT_A - 0.72 0.53 1.00 8 457 0 0 0 0 7
2LHP_A - 0.97 0.94 1.00 15 651 0 0 0 0 1
2LJJ_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 8 343 2 0 0 2 0
2LK3_A - 0.95 0.90 1.00 9 267 0 0 0 0 1
2LKR_A - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 6101 4 0 4 0 39
2LQZ_A - 0.85 0.82 0.90 9 341 1 1 0 0 2
2LWK_A - 0.83 0.77 0.91 10 485 1 0 1 0 3
2YIE_Z - 0.82 0.67 1.00 8 1532 0 0 0 0 4
2YIE_X - 0.76 0.58 1.00 7 1371 0 0 0 0 5
3J0L_7 - 0.60 0.41 0.88 7 1217 1 0 1 0 10
3J0L_1 - 0.65 0.47 0.90 9 1215 2 0 1 1 10
3J0L_h - 0.76 0.63 0.93 27 6076 4 0 2 2 16
3NMU_E - 0.41 0.17 1.00 1 560 3 0 0 3 5
3RKF_A 0.72 0.53 1.00 18 2193 0 0 0 0 16
3SIU_F - 0.73 0.55 1.00 6 372 0 0 0 0 5
3SN2_B 0.91 0.83 1.00 10 396 0 0 0 0 2
3U4M_B - 0.58 0.43 0.80 16 3140 4 0 4 0 21
3VJR_D - 0.96 0.92 1.00 12 618 0 0 0 0 1
4A1C_2 0.16 0.15 0.18 5 11753 29 5 18 6 28
4A4U_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 222 0 0 0 0 0
4ENB_A 0.76 0.58 1.00 11 1264 0 0 0 0 8

^top



Performance of Afold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Afold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 278
Total TN 43810
Total FP 133
Total FP CONTRA 14
Total FP INCONS 91
Total FP COMP 28
Total FN 176
Total Scores
MCC 0.664
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.692 ± 0.142
Sensitivity 0.612
Positive Predictive Value 0.726
Nr of predictions 25

^top



2. Individual counts for Afold [ 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
2LBS_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 14 482 0 0 0 0 0
2LC8_A 0.61 0.55 0.69 11 1524 6 0 5 1 9
2LDL_A - 0.90 0.82 1.00 9 342 1 0 0 1 2
2LDT_A - 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 454 0 0 0 0 4
2LHP_A - 0.97 0.94 1.00 15 651 0 0 0 0 1
2LJJ_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 8 343 2 0 0 2 0
2LK3_A - 0.95 0.90 1.00 9 267 0 0 0 0 1
2LKR_A - 0.93 0.87 1.00 34 6071 3 0 0 3 5
2LQZ_A - 0.85 0.82 0.90 9 341 1 1 0 0 2
2LWK_A - 0.75 0.69 0.82 9 485 2 0 2 0 4
2YIE_Z - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1525 16 3 12 1 12
2YIE_X - 0.36 0.33 0.40 4 1368 8 2 4 2 8
3J0L_7 - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1210 15 1 14 0 17
3J0L_1 - 0.73 0.63 0.86 12 1211 3 0 2 1 7
3J0L_h - 0.73 0.60 0.90 26 6076 5 0 3 2 17
3NMU_E - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 553 10 1 7 2 6
3RKF_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2191 0 0 0 0 14
3SIU_F - 0.85 0.73 1.00 8 370 0 0 0 0 3
3SN2_B 0.96 0.92 1.00 11 395 0 0 0 0 1
3U4M_B - 0.38 0.32 0.46 12 3134 14 0 14 0 25
3VJR_D - 0.96 0.92 1.00 12 618 1 0 0 1 1
4A1C_2 0.14 0.15 0.14 5 11745 43 5 26 12 28
4A4U_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 222 0 0 0 0 0
4ENB_A 0.67 0.58 0.79 11 1261 3 1 2 0 8

^top


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