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 Cylofold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric Cylofold UNAFold
MCC 0.693 > 0.687
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.672 ± 0.157 > 0.640 ± 0.169
Sensitivity 0.681 < 0.687
Positive Predictive Value 0.715 > 0.696
Total TP 211 < 213
Total TN 20906 > 20895
Total FP 106 < 122
Total FP CONTRA 27 > 26
Total FP INCONS 57 < 67
Total FP COMP 22 < 29
Total FN 99 > 97
P-value 0.000113973846536

^top




Performance plots


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

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

^top





Performance of Cylofold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Cylofold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 211
Total TN 20906
Total FP 106
Total FP CONTRA 27
Total FP INCONS 57
Total FP COMP 22
Total FN 99
Total Scores
MCC 0.693
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.672 ± 0.157
Sensitivity 0.681
Positive Predictive Value 0.715
Nr of predictions 13

^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
2KRL_A - 0.85 0.87 0.83 20 2000 12 4 0 8 3
2LC8_A 0.64 0.61 0.69 11 512 5 1 4 0 7
3ADB_C - 0.84 0.82 0.87 27 1788 4 0 4 0 6
3J0L_a - 0.17 0.18 0.20 2 401 9 3 5 1 9
3NKB_B - 0.46 0.42 0.53 8 720 7 0 7 0 11
3O58_3 0.42 0.50 0.35 11 4733 30 9 11 10 11
3PDR_A 0.86 0.78 0.95 39 4799 4 1 1 2 11
3RKF_A 0.91 0.83 1.00 20 846 0 0 0 0 4
3SD1_A 0.71 0.69 0.74 20 1506 7 2 5 0 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



Performance of UNAFold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for UNAFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 213
Total TN 20895
Total FP 122
Total FP CONTRA 26
Total FP INCONS 67
Total FP COMP 29
Total FN 97
Total Scores
MCC 0.687
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.640 ± 0.169
Sensitivity 0.687
Positive Predictive Value 0.696
Nr of predictions 13

^top



2. Individual counts for UNAFold [ 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
3ADB_C - 0.86 0.85 0.88 28 1787 4 0 4 0 5
3J0L_a - 0.55 0.64 0.50 7 397 8 5 2 1 4
3NKB_B - 0.69 0.74 0.67 14 714 7 0 7 0 5
3O58_3 0.42 0.50 0.35 11 4733 34 5 15 14 11
3PDR_A 0.93 0.92 0.94 46 4791 5 1 2 2 4
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
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.