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 RNAfold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric CentroidFold RNAfold
MCC 0.641 > 0.499
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.722 ± 0.091 > 0.611 ± 0.112
Sensitivity 0.639 > 0.550
Positive Predictive Value 0.644 > 0.454
Total TP 1264 > 1088
Total TN 3538370 > 3537936
Total FP 1077 < 1669
Total FP CONTRA 278 < 460
Total FP INCONS 422 < 850
Total FP COMP 377 > 359
Total FN 714 < 890
P-value 5.1503931209e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

  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 RNAfold).

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

^top





Performance of CentroidFold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for CentroidFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 1264
Total TN 3538370
Total FP 1077
Total FP CONTRA 278
Total FP INCONS 422
Total FP COMP 377
Total FN 714
Total Scores
MCC 0.641
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.722 ± 0.091
Sensitivity 0.639
Positive Predictive Value 0.644
Nr of predictions 27

^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
2ZZN_D 0.93 0.95 0.91 21 961 3 2 0 1 1
3A2K_C 0.49 0.55 0.46 12 1082 14 3 11 0 10
3A3A_A 0.97 0.93 1.00 28 1472 0 0 0 0 2
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
3JYX_5 - 0.45 0.48 0.42 232 1968448 572 135 187 250 249
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 RNAfold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNAfold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 1088
Total TN 3537936
Total FP 1669
Total FP CONTRA 460
Total FP INCONS 850
Total FP COMP 359
Total FN 890
Total Scores
MCC 0.499
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.611 ± 0.112
Sensitivity 0.550
Positive Predictive Value 0.454
Nr of predictions 27

^top



2. Individual counts for RNAfold [ 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 0.64 0.61 0.69 11 512 5 0 5 0 7
2ZZN_D 0.93 0.95 0.91 21 961 3 2 0 1 1
3A2K_C 0.47 0.50 0.46 11 1084 13 3 10 0 11
3A3A_A 0.97 0.93 1.00 28 1472 0 0 0 0 2
3ADB_C - 0.35 0.36 0.36 12 1786 22 1 20 1 21
3GX2_A 0.81 0.79 0.85 22 1423 5 2 2 1 6
3IVN_B 0.91 0.83 1.00 19 884 0 0 0 0 4
3IWN_A 0.69 0.68 0.70 19 1445 9 1 7 1 9
3IYQ_A 0.24 0.33 0.17 17 22340 95 45 38 12 34
3IZ4_A 0.56 0.60 0.52 57 25426 57 26 27 4 38
3J0L_a - 0.18 0.18 0.22 2 402 8 3 4 1 9
3JYV_7 -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 1089 22 4 18 0 20
3JYX_5 - 0.36 0.46 0.29 220 1968243 783 251 288 244 261
3KIY_A - 0.50 0.53 0.48 414 1485013 501 90 363 48 372
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 0.91 0.86 0.97 32 2245 5 1 0 4 5
3O58_3 0.41 0.50 0.34 11 4732 35 6 15 14 11
3PDR_A 0.90 0.90 0.90 45 4790 7 2 3 2 5
3RKF_A 0.91 0.83 1.00 20 846 0 0 0 0 4
3SD1_A 0.77 0.76 0.79 22 1505 6 4 2 0 7
3U4M_B - 0.49 0.55 0.46 12 1250 14 3 11 0 10
4A1C_2 0.19 0.25 0.15 5 4482 43 11 18 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 2 0 0 2 4
4ENC_A 0.37 0.33 0.45 5 485 7 0 6 1 10

^top


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