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 Contrafold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric Contrafold RNAsubopt
MCC 0.663 > 0.591
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.695 ± 0.101 > 0.583 ± 0.119
Sensitivity 0.678 > 0.615
Positive Predictive Value 0.654 > 0.574
Total TP 497 > 451
Total TN 85202 > 85176
Total FP 322 < 404
Total FP CONTRA 113 < 126
Total FP INCONS 150 < 209
Total FP COMP 59 < 69
Total FN 236 < 282
P-value 5.19332990918e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of Contrafold and RNAsubopt. 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 Contrafold and RNAsubopt).

  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 Contrafold and RNAsubopt).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for Contrafold and RNAsubopt. 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 Contrafold and RNAsubopt).

^top





Performance of Contrafold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Contrafold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 497
Total TN 85202
Total FP 322
Total FP CONTRA 113
Total FP INCONS 150
Total FP COMP 59
Total FN 236
Total Scores
MCC 0.663
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.695 ± 0.101
Sensitivity 0.678
Positive Predictive Value 0.654
Nr of predictions 28

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KFC_A - 0.71 0.63 0.83 5 230 1 1 0 0 3
2KRL_A - 0.91 0.87 0.95 20 2003 9 1 0 8 3
2LC8_A 0.46 0.39 0.58 7 516 5 3 2 0 11
2RP0_A - 0.84 0.71 1.00 5 111 0 0 0 0 2
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
3GCA_A - 0.76 0.71 0.83 5 152 1 1 0 0 2
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 0.86 0.79 0.96 22 1449 1 0 1 0 6
3IYQ_A 0.28 0.39 0.20 20 22341 95 44 35 16 31
3IZ4_A 0.57 0.58 0.57 55 25440 49 18 23 8 40
3J0L_a - 0.53 0.55 0.55 6 400 6 3 2 1 5
3JYV_7 -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 1091 20 4 16 0 20
3LA5_A 0.91 0.84 1.00 21 933 0 0 0 0 4
3NKB_B - 0.63 0.68 0.59 13 713 9 0 9 0 6
3NPB_A 0.86 0.84 0.89 31 2243 9 1 3 5 6
3O58_3 0.32 0.36 0.29 8 4736 21 7 13 1 14
3PDR_A 0.83 0.86 0.80 43 4786 13 5 6 2 7
3RKF_A 0.87 0.83 0.91 20 844 2 2 0 0 4
3SD1_A 0.68 0.69 0.69 20 1504 9 5 4 0 9
3U4M_B - 0.81 0.77 0.85 17 1256 5 0 3 2 5
4A1C_2 0.21 0.25 0.19 5 4489 33 9 13 11 15
4AOB_A 0.53 0.52 0.56 15 1410 13 3 9 1 14
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 RNAsubopt - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNAsubopt

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 451
Total TN 85176
Total FP 404
Total FP CONTRA 126
Total FP INCONS 209
Total FP COMP 69
Total FN 282
Total Scores
MCC 0.591
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.583 ± 0.119
Sensitivity 0.615
Positive Predictive Value 0.574
Nr of predictions 28

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KFC_A - -0.03 0.00 0.00 0 229 7 1 6 0 8
2KRL_A - 0.62 0.61 0.64 14 2002 15 5 3 7 9
2LC8_A -0.03 0.00 0.00 0 513 15 3 12 0 18
2RP0_A - 0.84 0.71 1.00 5 111 0 0 0 0 2
2ZZN_D 0.52 0.55 0.52 12 961 11 3 8 0 10
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 - 0.98 0.97 1.00 32 1787 0 0 0 0 1
3GCA_A - 0.84 0.71 1.00 5 153 0 0 0 0 2
3GX2_A 0.53 0.54 0.54 15 1421 14 4 9 1 13
3IVN_B 0.88 0.78 1.00 18 885 0 0 0 0 5
3IWN_A 0.69 0.68 0.70 19 1445 9 1 7 1 9
3IYQ_A 0.28 0.39 0.20 20 22342 96 41 37 18 31
3IZ4_A 0.56 0.60 0.53 57 25429 54 26 24 4 38
3J0L_a - 0.35 0.36 0.36 4 400 8 3 4 1 7
3JYV_7 -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 1090 21 4 17 0 20
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 0.84 0.78 0.91 29 2246 8 0 3 5 8
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 0.73 0.72 0.75 21 1505 7 4 3 0 8
3U4M_B - 0.49 0.55 0.46 12 1250 14 3 11 0 10
4A1C_2 0.18 0.25 0.14 5 4481 43 13 17 13 15
4AOB_A 0.62 0.62 0.64 18 1409 11 4 6 1 11
4ENB_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 461 2 0 0 2 4
4ENC_A 0.36 0.33 0.42 5 484 7 0 7 0 10

^top


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