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 UNAFold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric UNAFold MCFold
MCC 0.667 > 0.527
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.628 ± 0.141 > 0.498 ± 0.118
Sensitivity 0.671 > 0.563
Positive Predictive Value 0.672 > 0.508
Total TP 312 > 262
Total TN 29964 > 29912
Total FP 189 < 299
Total FP CONTRA 48 < 68
Total FP INCONS 104 < 186
Total FP COMP 37 < 45
Total FN 153 < 203
P-value 5.10776592382e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

  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 UNAFold and MCFold).

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

^top





Performance of UNAFold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for UNAFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 312
Total TN 29964
Total FP 189
Total FP CONTRA 48
Total FP INCONS 104
Total FP COMP 37
Total FN 153
Total Scores
MCC 0.667
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.628 ± 0.141
Sensitivity 0.671
Positive Predictive Value 0.672
Nr of predictions 22

^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
2KFC_A - -0.03 0.00 0.00 0 229 7 1 6 0 8
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 0.93 0.95 0.91 21 961 2 2 0 0 1
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
3GCA_A - 0.84 0.71 1.00 5 153 0 0 0 0 2
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
3IWN_A 0.80 0.79 0.81 22 1445 6 1 4 1 6
3J0L_a - 0.55 0.64 0.50 7 397 8 5 2 1 4
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
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
4A1C_2 0.19 0.25 0.15 5 4483 42 11 17 14 15
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



Performance of MCFold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for MCFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 262
Total TN 29912
Total FP 299
Total FP CONTRA 68
Total FP INCONS 186
Total FP COMP 45
Total FN 203
Total Scores
MCC 0.527
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.498 ± 0.118
Sensitivity 0.563
Positive Predictive Value 0.508
Nr of predictions 22

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KFC_A - 0.54 0.63 0.50 5 226 5 2 3 0 3
2LC8_A 0.44 0.44 0.47 8 511 10 0 9 1 10
2RP0_A - 0.70 0.71 0.71 5 109 2 1 1 0 2
2ZZN_D 0.69 0.73 0.67 16 960 11 1 7 3 6
3A2K_C 0.49 0.55 0.46 12 1082 14 3 11 0 10
3A3A_A 0.98 0.97 1.00 29 1471 0 0 0 0 1
3GCA_A - -0.05 0.00 0.00 0 150 8 4 4 0 7
3GX2_A 0.58 0.61 0.57 17 1419 15 1 12 2 11
3IVN_B 0.45 0.48 0.46 11 879 14 5 8 1 12
3IWN_A 0.19 0.21 0.20 6 1442 24 5 19 0 22
3J0L_a - 0.14 0.18 0.15 2 398 13 1 10 2 9
3JYV_7 0.25 0.30 0.24 6 1086 20 8 11 1 14
3LA5_A 0.44 0.44 0.48 11 931 12 2 10 0 14
3NKB_B - 0.68 0.74 0.64 14 713 8 2 6 0 5
3O58_3 0.28 0.36 0.22 8 4727 39 14 15 10 14
3PDR_A 0.78 0.80 0.77 40 4788 14 5 7 2 10
3RKF_A 0.89 0.88 0.91 21 843 3 0 2 1 3
3SD1_A 0.43 0.45 0.43 13 1503 17 1 16 0 16
3U4M_B - 0.74 0.77 0.71 17 1252 10 1 6 3 5
4A1C_2 0.18 0.25 0.14 5 4480 45 12 19 14 15
4ENB_A 0.78 0.73 0.85 11 459 4 0 2 2 4
4ENC_A 0.34 0.33 0.38 5 483 11 0 8 3 10

^top


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