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 MCFold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric MCFold RNAwolf
MCC 0.571 > 0.517
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.599 ± 0.123 > 0.593 ± 0.120
Sensitivity 0.599 > 0.490
Positive Predictive Value 0.552 < 0.555
Total TP 416 > 340
Total TN 69283 < 69423
Total FP 402 > 308
Total FP CONTRA 46 > 32
Total FP INCONS 291 > 241
Total FP COMP 65 > 35
Total FN 278 < 354
P-value 3.56938820447e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of MCFold and RNAwolf. 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 MCFold and RNAwolf).

  2. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for MCFold and RNAwolf. 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 MCFold and RNAwolf).

^top





Performance of MCFold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for MCFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 416
Total TN 69283
Total FP 402
Total FP CONTRA 46
Total FP INCONS 291
Total FP COMP 65
Total FN 278
Total Scores
MCC 0.571
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.599 ± 0.123
Sensitivity 0.599
Positive Predictive Value 0.552
Nr of predictions 36

^top



2. Individual counts for MCFold [ 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 14 482 1 0 0 1 0
2LC8_A 0.41 0.45 0.39 9 1517 16 0 14 2 11
2LDL_A - 0.95 0.91 1.00 10 341 2 0 0 2 1
2LDT_A - 0.75 0.73 0.79 11 451 3 0 3 0 4
2LHP_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 16 650 1 0 0 1 0
2LI4_A - 0.97 0.94 1.00 15 481 0 0 0 0 1
2LJJ_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 8 343 2 0 0 2 0
2LK3_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 10 266 0 0 0 0 0
2LKR_A - 0.93 0.92 0.95 36 6067 14 0 2 12 3
2LQZ_A - 0.91 0.91 0.91 10 340 1 1 0 0 1
2LWK_A - 0.92 0.92 0.92 12 483 2 0 1 1 1
2YIE_X - 0.06 0.08 0.06 1 1361 21 1 15 5 11
2YIE_Z - 0.36 0.50 0.27 6 1518 18 4 12 2 6
3AMU_B 0.44 0.48 0.42 13 2972 18 2 16 0 14
3J0L_2 - 0.21 0.24 0.18 8 6172 39 7 29 3 25
3J0L_g - 0.13 0.25 0.08 1 452 12 8 4 0 3
3J0L_7 - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1206 19 4 15 0 17
3J0L_h - 0.91 0.91 0.91 39 6062 13 0 4 9 4
3J0L_1 - 0.79 0.79 0.79 15 1206 6 0 4 2 4
3J0L_a - 0.16 0.19 0.17 3 1110 15 1 14 0 13
3J0L_8 - 1.00 1.00 1.00 8 182 0 0 0 0 0
3J16_L 0.45 0.47 0.44 14 2743 19 1 17 1 16
3RKF_A 0.70 0.65 0.76 22 2182 7 1 6 0 12
3SD1_A 0.33 0.33 0.35 14 3876 26 0 26 0 28
3SIU_F - 0.42 0.45 0.42 5 366 7 1 6 0 6
3SN2_B 0.55 0.58 0.54 7 393 6 0 6 0 5
3TRZ_Z - -0.04 0.00 0.00 0 201 9 0 9 0 6
3TS0_U - 1.00 1.00 1.00 6 247 2 0 0 2 0
3TS2_V - -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 268 9 0 8 1 5
3U4M_B - 0.59 0.59 0.59 22 3123 15 0 15 0 15
3VJR_D - 1.00 1.00 1.00 13 617 1 0 0 1 0
4A1C_2 0.13 0.15 0.11 5 11735 56 10 31 15 28
4A1C_3 0.68 0.67 0.71 36 7089 17 1 14 2 18
4A4U_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 222 0 0 0 0 0
4ENB_A 0.61 0.63 0.60 12 1255 8 2 6 0 7
4ENC_A 0.28 0.32 0.27 6 1304 17 2 14 1 13

^top



Performance of RNAwolf - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNAwolf

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 340
Total TN 69423
Total FP 308
Total FP CONTRA 32
Total FP INCONS 241
Total FP COMP 35
Total FN 354
Total Scores
MCC 0.517
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.593 ± 0.120
Sensitivity 0.490
Positive Predictive Value 0.555
Nr of predictions 36

^top



2. Individual counts for RNAwolf [ 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 14 482 0 0 0 0 0
2LC8_A 0.52 0.50 0.56 10 1522 8 0 8 0 10
2LDL_A - 0.74 0.64 0.88 7 343 1 0 1 0 4
2LDT_A - 0.86 0.80 0.92 12 452 1 0 1 0 3
2LHP_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 16 650 1 0 0 1 0
2LI4_A - 0.97 0.94 1.00 15 481 0 0 0 0 1
2LJJ_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 8 343 3 0 0 3 0
2LK3_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 10 266 0 0 0 0 0
2LKR_A - 0.81 0.74 0.88 29 6072 8 0 4 4 10
2LQZ_A - 0.91 0.91 0.91 10 340 1 1 0 0 1
2LWK_A - 0.37 0.38 0.38 5 483 9 0 8 1 8
2YIE_X - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1364 15 4 10 1 12
2YIE_Z - 0.43 0.42 0.45 5 1529 9 1 5 3 7
3AMU_B 0.68 0.63 0.74 17 2980 9 0 6 3 10
3J0L_2 - 0.11 0.12 0.11 4 6181 34 5 26 3 29
3J0L_g - 0.16 0.25 0.11 1 456 8 6 2 0 3
3J0L_7 - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1214 11 0 11 0 17
3J0L_h - 0.33 0.30 0.37 13 6070 24 0 22 2 30
3J0L_1 - 0.68 0.63 0.75 12 1209 5 0 4 1 7
3J0L_a - 0.18 0.19 0.20 3 1113 12 1 11 0 13
3J0L_8 - 0.93 0.88 1.00 7 183 0 0 0 0 1
3J16_L 0.45 0.40 0.52 12 2752 11 0 11 0 18
3RKF_A 0.72 0.62 0.84 21 2186 4 0 4 0 13
3SD1_A 0.46 0.43 0.50 18 3880 18 0 18 0 24
3SIU_F - 0.73 0.55 1.00 6 372 0 0 0 0 5
3SN2_B 1.00 1.00 1.00 12 394 0 0 0 0 0
3TRZ_Z - 0.91 0.83 1.00 5 205 0 0 0 0 1
3TS0_U - 1.00 1.00 1.00 6 247 2 0 0 2 0
3TS2_V - -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 270 7 0 6 1 5
3U4M_B - 0.44 0.38 0.52 14 3133 13 0 13 0 23
3VJR_D - 1.00 1.00 1.00 13 617 1 0 0 1 0
4A1C_2 0.08 0.09 0.08 3 11741 46 10 27 9 30
4A1C_3 0.23 0.20 0.28 11 7101 28 2 26 0 43
4A4U_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 222 0 0 0 0 0
4ENB_A 0.35 0.32 0.40 6 1260 9 1 8 0 13
4ENC_A 0.34 0.32 0.38 6 1310 10 1 9 0 13

^top


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