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 RNAwolf - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric RNAwolf NanoFolder
MCC 0.524 > 0.490
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.635 ± 0.165 < 0.644 ± 0.159
Sensitivity 0.483 < 0.495
Positive Predictive Value 0.578 > 0.494
Total TP 196 < 201
Total TN 44666 > 44598
Total FP 160 < 218
Total FP CONTRA 16 < 31
Total FP INCONS 127 < 175
Total FP COMP 17 > 12
Total FN 210 > 205
P-value 5.24403703175e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

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

^top





Performance of RNAwolf - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNAwolf

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 196
Total TN 44666
Total FP 160
Total FP CONTRA 16
Total FP INCONS 127
Total FP COMP 17
Total FN 210
Total Scores
MCC 0.524
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.635 ± 0.165
Sensitivity 0.483
Positive Predictive Value 0.578
Nr of predictions 17

^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
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
2LI4_A - 0.97 0.94 1.00 15 481 0 0 0 0 1
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
3J16_L 0.45 0.40 0.52 12 2752 11 0 11 0 18
3SN2_B 1.00 1.00 1.00 12 394 0 0 0 0 0
3U4M_B - 0.44 0.38 0.52 14 3133 13 0 13 0 23
3UZL_B 0.72 0.59 0.88 22 3545 4 1 2 1 15
3VJR_D - 1.00 1.00 1.00 13 617 1 0 0 1 0
4A1C_3 0.23 0.20 0.28 11 7101 28 2 26 0 43
4A1C_2 0.08 0.09 0.08 3 11741 46 10 27 9 30
4A4U_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 222 0 0 0 0 0
4AOB_A 0.23 0.19 0.30 8 4344 20 1 18 1 34
4ENC_A 0.34 0.32 0.38 6 1310 10 1 9 0 13

^top



Performance of NanoFolder - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for NanoFolder

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 201
Total TN 44598
Total FP 218
Total FP CONTRA 31
Total FP INCONS 175
Total FP COMP 12
Total FN 205
Total Scores
MCC 0.490
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.644 ± 0.159
Sensitivity 0.495
Positive Predictive Value 0.494
Nr of predictions 17

^top



2. Individual counts for NanoFolder [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.52 0.55 0.50 11 1518 11 0 11 0 9
2LDL_A - 0.90 0.82 1.00 9 342 1 0 0 1 2
2LI4_A - 0.93 0.88 1.00 14 482 0 0 0 0 2
2LK3_A - 0.95 0.90 1.00 9 267 0 0 0 0 1
2LKR_A - 0.29 0.33 0.25 13 6054 38 8 30 0 26
2LQZ_A - 0.91 0.91 0.91 10 340 1 1 0 0 1
2LWK_A - 0.83 0.77 0.91 10 485 2 0 1 1 3
3J16_L 0.36 0.37 0.37 11 2745 19 3 16 0 19
3SN2_B 0.96 0.92 1.00 11 395 0 0 0 0 1
3U4M_B - 0.61 0.57 0.66 21 3128 11 1 10 0 16
3UZL_B 0.36 0.35 0.38 13 3536 21 3 18 0 24
3VJR_D - 0.96 0.92 1.00 12 618 0 0 0 0 1
4A1C_3 0.48 0.46 0.51 25 7091 24 2 22 0 29
4A1C_2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 11728 61 12 41 8 33
4A4U_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 222 0 0 0 0 0
4AOB_A 0.33 0.29 0.39 12 4340 20 1 18 1 30
4ENC_A 0.57 0.58 0.58 11 1307 9 0 8 1 8

^top


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