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 RNAshapes - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric UNAFold RNAshapes
MCC 0.633 > 0.610
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.638 ± 0.117 > 0.622 ± 0.114
Sensitivity 0.655 > 0.625
Positive Predictive Value 0.619 > 0.602
Total TP 480 > 458
Total TN 85186 < 85201
Total FP 368 < 371
Total FP CONTRA 111 > 103
Total FP INCONS 185 < 200
Total FP COMP 72 > 68
Total FN 253 < 275
P-value 5.06544643719e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

  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 RNAshapes).

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

^top





Performance of UNAFold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for UNAFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 480
Total TN 85186
Total FP 368
Total FP CONTRA 111
Total FP INCONS 185
Total FP COMP 72
Total FN 253
Total Scores
MCC 0.633
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.638 ± 0.117
Sensitivity 0.655
Positive Predictive Value 0.619
Nr of predictions 28

^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
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
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
3ADB_C - 0.86 0.85 0.88 28 1787 4 0 4 0 5
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
3IYQ_A 0.23 0.33 0.17 17 22339 96 46 38 12 34
3IZ4_A 0.58 0.60 0.57 57 25436 53 12 31 10 38
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
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
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
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



Performance of RNAshapes - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNAshapes

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 458
Total TN 85201
Total FP 371
Total FP CONTRA 103
Total FP INCONS 200
Total FP COMP 68
Total FN 275
Total Scores
MCC 0.610
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.622 ± 0.114
Sensitivity 0.625
Positive Predictive Value 0.602
Nr of predictions 28

^top



2. Individual counts for RNAshapes [ 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 - 0.91 0.87 0.95 20 2003 9 1 0 8 3
2LC8_A 0.64 0.61 0.69 11 512 5 0 5 0 7
2RP0_A - 0.84 0.71 1.00 5 111 0 0 0 0 2
2ZZN_D 0.77 0.77 0.77 17 962 5 1 4 0 5
3A2K_C 0.47 0.50 0.46 11 1084 13 3 10 0 11
3A3A_A 0.84 0.80 0.89 24 1473 3 0 3 0 6
3ADB_C - 0.71 0.70 0.74 23 1788 8 0 8 0 10
3GCA_A - 0.84 0.71 1.00 5 153 0 0 0 0 2
3GX2_A 0.91 0.89 0.93 25 1422 3 1 1 1 3
3IVN_B 0.91 0.83 1.00 19 884 0 0 0 0 4
3IWN_A 0.83 0.79 0.88 22 1447 3 1 2 0 6
3IYQ_A 0.19 0.27 0.14 14 22340 95 43 43 9 37
3IZ4_A 0.57 0.58 0.56 55 25437 50 16 28 6 40
3J0L_a - 0.18 0.18 0.22 2 402 8 3 4 1 9
3JYV_7 -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 1092 20 1 18 1 20
3LA5_A 0.89 0.80 1.00 20 934 0 0 0 0 5
3NKB_B - 0.75 0.74 0.78 14 717 6 0 4 2 5
3NPB_A 0.84 0.76 0.93 28 2248 5 1 1 3 9
3O58_3 0.41 0.50 0.34 11 4732 38 6 15 17 11
3PDR_A 0.80 0.80 0.80 40 4790 12 3 7 2 10
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 0.16 5 4484 41 11 16 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.