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 Afold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

  4. Performance of Mastr(20) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric Afold Mastr(20)
MCC 0.565 > 0.538
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.593 ± 0.238 > 0.515 ± 0.292
Sensitivity 0.591 > 0.350
Positive Predictive Value 0.547 < 0.835
Total TP 179 > 106
Total TN 42181 < 42381
Total FP 190 > 25
Total FP CONTRA 51 > 3
Total FP INCONS 97 > 18
Total FP COMP 42 > 4
Total FN 124 < 197
P-value 0.0286195353294

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of Afold and Mastr(20). 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 Afold and Mastr(20)).

  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 Afold and Mastr(20)).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for Afold and Mastr(20). 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 Afold and Mastr(20)).

^top





Performance of Afold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Afold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 179
Total TN 42181
Total FP 190
Total FP CONTRA 51
Total FP INCONS 97
Total FP COMP 42
Total FN 124
Total Scores
MCC 0.565
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.593 ± 0.238
Sensitivity 0.591
Positive Predictive Value 0.547
Nr of predictions 10

^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
3A2K_C 0.46 0.50 0.44 11 1083 14 3 11 0 11
3IVN_B 0.91 0.83 1.00 19 884 0 0 0 0 4
3IZ4_A 0.52 0.57 0.48 54 25423 63 27 32 4 41
3JYV_7 -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 1088 23 4 19 0 20
3LA5_A 0.91 0.84 1.00 21 933 0 0 0 0 4
3NPB_A 0.82 0.73 0.93 27 2249 6 0 2 4 10
3O58_3 0.41 0.50 0.34 11 4732 38 6 15 17 11
3RKF_A 0.91 0.83 1.00 20 846 0 0 0 0 4
4A1C_2 0.19 0.25 0.15 5 4483 43 11 17 15 15
4ENB_A 0.81 0.73 0.92 11 460 3 0 1 2 4

^top



Performance of Mastr(20) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Mastr(20)

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 106
Total TN 42381
Total FP 25
Total FP CONTRA 3
Total FP INCONS 18
Total FP COMP 4
Total FN 197
Total Scores
MCC 0.538
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.515 ± 0.292
Sensitivity 0.350
Positive Predictive Value 0.835
Nr of predictions 10

^top



2. Individual counts for Mastr(20) [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
3A2K_C 0.81 0.77 0.85 17 1088 3 0 3 0 5
3IVN_B 0.86 0.83 0.90 19 882 2 2 0 0 4
3IZ4_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 25536 0 0 0 0 95
3JYV_7 0.97 0.95 1.00 19 1092 2 0 0 2 1
3LA5_A 0.89 0.80 1.00 20 934 0 0 0 0 5
3NPB_A 0.34 0.30 0.41 11 2251 18 1 15 2 26
3O58_3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 4764 0 0 0 0 22
3RKF_A 0.84 0.71 1.00 17 849 0 0 0 0 7
4A1C_2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 4516 0 0 0 0 20
4ENB_A 0.44 0.20 1.00 3 469 0 0 0 0 12

^top


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