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 CentroidFold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric CentroidFold MaxExpect
MCC 0.701 > 0.648
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.714 ± 0.096 > 0.630 ± 0.113
Sensitivity 0.680 > 0.660
Positive Predictive Value 0.723 > 0.637
Total TP 983 > 953
Total TN 1567489 > 1567351
Total FP 502 < 673
Total FP CONTRA 141 < 180
Total FP INCONS 235 < 364
Total FP COMP 126 < 129
Total FN 462 < 492
P-value 5.02343278931e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of CentroidFold and MaxExpect. 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 CentroidFold and MaxExpect).

  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 CentroidFold and MaxExpect).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for CentroidFold and MaxExpect. 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 CentroidFold and MaxExpect).

^top





Performance of CentroidFold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for CentroidFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 983
Total TN 1567489
Total FP 502
Total FP CONTRA 141
Total FP INCONS 235
Total FP COMP 126
Total FN 462
Total Scores
MCC 0.701
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.714 ± 0.096
Sensitivity 0.680
Positive Predictive Value 0.723
Nr of predictions 24

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KRL_A - 0.91 0.87 0.95 20 2003 9 1 0 8 3
2LC8_A 0.51 0.39 0.70 7 518 3 1 2 0 11
3A2K_C 0.49 0.55 0.46 12 1082 14 3 11 0 10
3ADB_C - 0.98 0.97 1.00 32 1787 0 0 0 0 1
3GX2_A 0.94 0.89 1.00 25 1424 1 0 0 1 3
3IVN_B 0.91 0.83 1.00 19 884 0 0 0 0 4
3IWN_A 0.86 0.79 0.96 22 1449 1 0 1 0 6
3IYQ_A 0.29 0.39 0.22 20 22347 86 39 34 13 31
3IZ4_A 0.60 0.57 0.64 54 25451 38 16 15 7 41
3J0L_a - 0.41 0.36 0.50 4 403 5 3 1 1 7
3JYV_7 0.92 0.85 1.00 17 1094 2 0 0 2 3
3KIY_A - 0.71 0.68 0.75 536 1485164 253 58 122 73 250
3LA5_A 0.91 0.84 1.00 21 933 0 0 0 0 4
3NKB_B - 0.66 0.68 0.65 13 715 7 0 7 0 6
3NPB_A 0.87 0.84 0.91 31 2244 8 1 2 5 6
3O58_3 0.44 0.41 0.47 9 4745 11 1 9 1 13
3PDR_A 0.88 0.86 0.90 43 4792 7 2 3 2 7
3RKF_A 0.91 0.83 1.00 20 846 0 0 0 0 4
3SD1_A 0.70 0.69 0.71 20 1505 8 4 4 0 9
3U4M_B - 0.81 0.77 0.85 17 1256 5 0 3 2 5
4A1C_2 0.22 0.25 0.19 5 4490 29 9 12 8 15
4AOB_A 0.50 0.48 0.54 14 1411 13 3 9 1 15
4ENB_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 461 1 0 0 1 4
4ENC_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 485 1 0 0 1 4

^top



Performance of MaxExpect - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for MaxExpect

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 953
Total TN 1567351
Total FP 673
Total FP CONTRA 180
Total FP INCONS 364
Total FP COMP 129
Total FN 492
Total Scores
MCC 0.648
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.630 ± 0.113
Sensitivity 0.660
Positive Predictive Value 0.637
Nr of predictions 24

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KRL_A - 0.91 0.87 0.95 20 2003 9 1 0 8 3
2LC8_A -0.03 0.00 0.00 0 513 15 3 12 0 18
3A2K_C 0.47 0.50 0.46 11 1084 13 3 10 0 11
3ADB_C - 0.86 0.85 0.88 28 1787 4 0 4 0 5
3GX2_A 0.93 0.89 0.96 25 1423 2 1 0 1 3
3IVN_B 0.91 0.83 1.00 19 884 0 0 0 0 4
3IWN_A 0.80 0.79 0.81 22 1445 6 1 4 1 6
3IYQ_A 0.24 0.33 0.17 17 22342 96 41 40 15 34
3IZ4_A 0.61 0.61 0.62 58 25442 42 14 22 6 37
3J0L_a - 0.39 0.36 0.44 4 402 6 4 1 1 7
3JYV_7 0.48 0.45 0.53 9 1094 9 3 5 1 11
3KIY_A - 0.67 0.68 0.66 531 1485073 336 81 195 60 255
3LA5_A 0.91 0.84 1.00 21 933 0 0 0 0 4
3NKB_B - 0.69 0.74 0.67 14 714 7 0 7 0 5
3NPB_A 0.77 0.73 0.82 27 2245 10 0 6 4 10
3O58_3 0.40 0.50 0.33 11 4731 36 8 14 14 11
3PDR_A 0.92 0.90 0.94 45 4792 5 1 2 2 5
3RKF_A 0.91 0.83 1.00 20 846 0 0 0 0 4
3SD1_A 0.70 0.69 0.71 20 1505 8 3 5 0 9
3U4M_B - 0.58 0.59 0.59 13 1254 9 2 7 0 9
4A1C_2 0.19 0.25 0.16 5 4484 41 10 17 14 15
4AOB_A 0.60 0.59 0.63 17 1410 11 4 6 1 12
4ENB_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 461 0 0 0 0 4
4ENC_A 0.36 0.33 0.42 5 484 8 0 7 1 10

^top


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