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 ContextFold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric ContextFold Cylofold
MCC 0.738 > 0.602
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.746 ± 0.149 > 0.614 ± 0.340
Sensitivity 0.673 > 0.600
Positive Predictive Value 0.822 > 0.623
Total TP 74 > 66
Total TN 4530 > 4514
Total FP 18 < 42
Total FP CONTRA 3 < 11
Total FP INCONS 13 < 29
Total FP COMP 2 = 2
Total FN 36 < 44
P-value 0.0

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of ContextFold and Cylofold. 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 ContextFold and Cylofold).

  2. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for ContextFold and Cylofold. 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 ContextFold and Cylofold).

^top





Performance of ContextFold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for ContextFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 74
Total TN 4530
Total FP 18
Total FP CONTRA 3
Total FP INCONS 13
Total FP COMP 2
Total FN 36
Total Scores
MCC 0.738
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.746 ± 0.149
Sensitivity 0.673
Positive Predictive Value 0.822
Nr of predictions 6

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.58 0.56 0.63 10 512 6 0 6 0 8
3J0L_a - 0.80 0.73 0.89 8 402 2 0 1 1 3
3U4M_B - 0.98 0.95 1.00 21 1255 0 0 0 0 1
4AOB_A 0.62 0.59 0.68 17 1412 9 2 6 1 12
4ENB_A 0.77 0.60 1.00 9 463 0 0 0 0 6
4ENC_A 0.73 0.60 0.90 9 486 1 1 0 0 6

^top



Performance of Cylofold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Cylofold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 66
Total TN 4514
Total FP 42
Total FP CONTRA 11
Total FP INCONS 29
Total FP COMP 2
Total FN 44
Total Scores
MCC 0.602
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.614 ± 0.340
Sensitivity 0.600
Positive Predictive Value 0.623
Nr of predictions 6

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.64 0.61 0.69 11 512 5 1 4 0 7
3J0L_a - 0.17 0.18 0.20 2 401 9 3 5 1 9
3U4M_B - 0.49 0.55 0.46 12 1250 14 3 11 0 10
4AOB_A 0.42 0.38 0.48 11 1414 13 3 9 1 18
4ENB_A 1.00 1.00 1.00 15 457 0 0 0 0 0
4ENC_A 0.97 1.00 0.94 15 480 1 1 0 0 0

^top


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