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 Fold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric ContextFold Fold
MCC 0.662 > 0.348
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.676 ± 0.208 > 0.317 ± 0.214
Sensitivity 0.608 > 0.362
Positive Predictive Value 0.731 > 0.353
Total TP 79 > 47
Total TN 9028 > 9003
Total FP 44 < 104
Total FP CONTRA 6 < 24
Total FP INCONS 23 < 62
Total FP COMP 15 < 18
Total FN 51 < 83
P-value 0.0

^top




Performance plots


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

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

^top





Performance of ContextFold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for ContextFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 79
Total TN 9028
Total FP 44
Total FP CONTRA 6
Total FP INCONS 23
Total FP COMP 15
Total FN 51
Total Scores
MCC 0.662
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.676 ± 0.208
Sensitivity 0.608
Positive Predictive Value 0.731
Nr of predictions 7

^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
4A1C_2 0.26 0.25 0.28 5 4498 26 3 10 13 15
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 Fold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Fold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 47
Total TN 9003
Total FP 104
Total FP CONTRA 24
Total FP INCONS 62
Total FP COMP 18
Total FN 83
Total Scores
MCC 0.348
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.317 ± 0.214
Sensitivity 0.362
Positive Predictive Value 0.353
Nr of predictions 7

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A -0.03 0.00 0.00 0 513 15 3 12 0 18
3J0L_a - 0.15 0.18 0.17 2 399 11 4 6 1 9
3U4M_B - 0.58 0.59 0.59 13 1254 9 2 7 0 9
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 0.37 0.33 0.45 5 461 7 0 6 1 10
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.