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 RNAalifold(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

  5. Compile and download dataset for RNAalifold(seed) & MCFold [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric RNAalifold(seed) MCFold
MCC 0.629 > 0.547
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.605 ± 0.100 < 0.609 ± 0.130
Sensitivity 0.443 < 0.562
Positive Predictive Value 0.898 > 0.538
Total TP 316 < 401
Total TN 93916 > 93523
Total FP 46 < 395
Total FP CONTRA 5 < 45
Total FP INCONS 31 < 299
Total FP COMP 10 < 51
Total FN 397 > 312
P-value 5.19332990918e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of RNAalifold(seed) and MCFold. 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 RNAalifold(seed) and MCFold).

  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 RNAalifold(seed) and MCFold).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for RNAalifold(seed) and MCFold. 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 RNAalifold(seed) and MCFold).

^top





Performance of RNAalifold(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNAalifold(seed)

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 316
Total TN 93916
Total FP 46
Total FP CONTRA 5
Total FP INCONS 31
Total FP COMP 10
Total FN 397
Total Scores
MCC 0.629
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.605 ± 0.100
Sensitivity 0.443
Positive Predictive Value 0.898
Nr of predictions 25

^top



2. Individual counts for RNAalifold(seed) [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KDQ_B 0.52 0.27 1.00 3 403 0 0 0 0 8
2KE6_A 0.97 0.95 1.00 18 1110 1 0 0 1 1
2KUR_A 0.95 0.90 1.00 19 1109 0 0 0 0 2
2KUU_A 0.92 0.86 1.00 18 1110 1 0 0 1 3
2KUV_A 0.93 0.86 1.00 19 1109 0 0 0 0 3
2KUW_A 0.84 0.76 0.94 16 1111 1 0 1 0 5
2KX8_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 861 0 0 0 0 18
2L1F_A 0.67 0.58 0.78 14 2062 4 0 4 0 10
2L1F_B 0.64 0.56 0.74 14 2126 5 0 5 0 11
2L94_A 0.59 0.40 0.89 8 981 1 0 1 0 12
2LC8_A -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1528 12 0 12 0 20
2XKV_B 0.59 0.35 1.00 7 4553 2 0 0 2 13
2XXA_G 0.46 0.21 1.00 9 5142 0 0 0 0 33
3A3A_A 0.71 0.51 1.00 19 3636 0 0 0 0 18
3GX2_A 0.74 0.55 1.00 22 4349 1 0 0 1 18
3IVN_B 0.61 0.48 0.79 15 2327 4 2 2 0 16
3JYX_4 0.46 0.21 1.00 7 12239 2 0 0 2 26
3LA5_A 0.63 0.47 0.84 16 2466 3 1 2 0 18
3O58_3 0.51 0.26 1.00 9 12394 0 0 0 0 26
3PDR_A 0.68 0.46 1.00 33 12847 1 0 0 1 39
3RKF_A 0.63 0.47 0.84 16 2192 3 1 2 0 18
3SD1_A 0.58 0.40 0.85 17 3896 3 1 2 0 25
4A1C_2 0.39 0.15 1.00 5 11776 2 0 0 2 28
4ENB_A 0.56 0.32 1.00 6 1269 0 0 0 0 13
4ENC_A 0.56 0.32 1.00 6 1320 0 0 0 0 13

^top



Performance of MCFold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for MCFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 401
Total TN 93523
Total FP 395
Total FP CONTRA 45
Total FP INCONS 299
Total FP COMP 51
Total FN 312
Total Scores
MCC 0.547
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.609 ± 0.130
Sensitivity 0.562
Positive Predictive Value 0.538
Nr of predictions 25

^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
2KDQ_B 0.95 0.91 1.00 10 396 1 0 0 1 1
2KE6_A 1.00 1.00 1.00 19 1109 2 0 0 2 0
2KUR_A 1.00 1.00 1.00 21 1107 0 0 0 0 0
2KUU_A 0.98 0.95 1.00 20 1108 1 0 0 1 1
2KUV_A 0.98 0.95 1.00 21 1107 0 0 0 0 1
2KUW_A 0.95 0.95 0.95 20 1107 1 0 1 0 1
2KX8_A 0.91 0.89 0.94 16 844 2 0 1 1 2
2L1F_A 0.72 0.75 0.69 18 2054 9 0 8 1 6
2L1F_B 0.73 0.76 0.70 19 2118 9 0 8 1 6
2L94_A 0.97 0.95 1.00 19 971 0 0 0 0 1
2LC8_A 0.41 0.45 0.39 9 1517 16 0 14 2 11
2XKV_B 0.20 0.25 0.17 5 4530 37 2 23 12 15
2XXA_G 0.23 0.24 0.24 10 5110 32 1 30 1 32
3A3A_A 0.89 0.86 0.91 32 3620 3 1 2 0 5
3GX2_A 0.47 0.48 0.48 19 4331 22 0 21 1 21
3IVN_B 0.39 0.39 0.40 12 2316 18 0 18 0 19
3JYX_4 0.20 0.24 0.17 8 12199 43 16 23 4 25
3LA5_A 0.32 0.32 0.34 11 2453 21 1 20 0 23
3O58_3 0.22 0.26 0.19 9 12355 45 9 30 6 26
3PDR_A 0.66 0.61 0.72 44 12819 19 0 17 2 28
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
4A1C_2 0.13 0.15 0.11 5 11735 56 10 31 15 28
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


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