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 RNAalifold(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

  5. Compile and download dataset for RNAalifold(20) & UNAFold [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric RNAalifold(20) UNAFold
MCC 0.753 > 0.662
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.747 ± 0.122 > 0.654 ± 0.145
Sensitivity 0.656 < 0.663
Positive Predictive Value 0.869 > 0.667
Total TP 298 < 301
Total TN 51920 > 51812
Total FP 66 < 200
Total FP CONTRA 18 < 49
Total FP INCONS 27 < 101
Total FP COMP 21 < 50
Total FN 156 > 153
P-value 2.48055519165e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of RNAalifold(20) 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 RNAalifold(20) and UNAFold).

  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 RNAalifold(20) and UNAFold).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for RNAalifold(20) 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 RNAalifold(20) and UNAFold).

^top





Performance of RNAalifold(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNAalifold(20)

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 298
Total TN 51920
Total FP 66
Total FP CONTRA 18
Total FP INCONS 27
Total FP COMP 21
Total FN 156
Total Scores
MCC 0.753
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.747 ± 0.122
Sensitivity 0.656
Positive Predictive Value 0.869
Nr of predictions 15

^top



2. Individual counts for RNAalifold(20) [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
3A2K_C 0.98 0.95 1.00 21 1087 0 0 0 0 1
3GX2_A 0.92 0.86 1.00 24 1425 1 0 0 1 4
3IVN_B 0.86 0.78 0.95 18 884 1 1 0 0 5
3IZ4_A 0.65 0.48 0.87 46 25483 15 4 3 8 49
3JYV_7 0.97 0.95 1.00 19 1092 2 0 0 2 1
3LA5_A 0.87 0.76 1.00 19 935 0 0 0 0 6
3NPB_A 0.75 0.57 1.00 21 2257 4 0 0 4 16
3O58_3 0.42 0.36 0.50 8 4748 9 3 5 1 14
3PDR_A 0.92 0.88 0.96 44 4794 3 1 1 1 6
3RKF_A 0.81 0.71 0.94 17 848 1 0 1 0 7
3SD1_A 0.84 0.86 0.83 25 1503 5 4 1 0 4
4A1C_2 0.22 0.25 0.19 5 4490 23 5 16 2 15
4AOB_A 0.85 0.72 1.00 21 1416 2 0 0 2 8
4ENB_A 0.51 0.27 1.00 4 468 0 0 0 0 11
4ENC_A 0.63 0.40 1.00 6 490 0 0 0 0 9

^top



Performance of UNAFold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for UNAFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 301
Total TN 51812
Total FP 200
Total FP CONTRA 49
Total FP INCONS 101
Total FP COMP 50
Total FN 153
Total Scores
MCC 0.662
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.654 ± 0.145
Sensitivity 0.663
Positive Predictive Value 0.667
Nr of predictions 15

^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
3A2K_C 0.47 0.50 0.46 11 1084 13 3 10 0 11
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
3IZ4_A 0.58 0.60 0.57 57 25436 53 12 31 10 38
3JYV_7 0.24 0.25 0.25 5 1091 16 7 8 1 15
3LA5_A 0.91 0.84 1.00 21 933 0 0 0 0 4
3NPB_A 0.85 0.78 0.94 29 2247 6 0 2 4 8
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
4A1C_2 0.19 0.25 0.15 5 4483 42 11 17 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.