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 Afold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric Afold Cylofold
MCC 0.632 > 0.621
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.602 ± 0.152 < 0.627 ± 0.111
Sensitivity 0.573 > 0.533
Positive Predictive Value 0.703 < 0.729
Total TP 286 > 266
Total TN 63859 < 63901
Total FP 141 > 111
Total FP CONTRA 11 > 8
Total FP INCONS 110 > 91
Total FP COMP 20 > 12
Total FN 213 < 233
P-value 0.00238442710916

^top




Performance plots


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

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

^top





Performance of Afold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Afold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 286
Total TN 63859
Total FP 141
Total FP CONTRA 11
Total FP INCONS 110
Total FP COMP 20
Total FN 213
Total Scores
MCC 0.632
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.602 ± 0.152
Sensitivity 0.573
Positive Predictive Value 0.703
Nr of predictions 15

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KX8_A 0.94 0.89 1.00 16 845 0 0 0 0 2
2LC8_A 0.61 0.55 0.69 11 1524 6 0 5 1 9
2LKR_A - 0.93 0.87 1.00 34 6071 3 0 0 3 5
3ADB_C - 0.78 0.74 0.82 28 4152 6 0 6 0 10
3AKZ_H 0.16 0.14 0.19 4 2680 17 2 15 0 24
3AM1_B - 0.72 0.66 0.79 23 3211 6 0 6 0 12
3IZF_C 0.66 0.57 0.76 31 6862 10 1 9 0 23
3J0L_7 - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1210 15 1 14 0 17
3NDB_M - 0.84 0.74 0.96 45 9133 3 0 2 1 16
3NKB_B - 0.59 0.54 0.67 14 1995 7 0 7 0 12
3O58_2 0.66 0.66 0.66 25 7222 14 4 9 1 13
3O58_3 0.34 0.34 0.34 12 12368 37 2 21 14 23
3RKF_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2191 0 0 0 0 14
3U4M_B - 0.38 0.32 0.46 12 3134 14 0 14 0 25
4ENB_A 0.67 0.58 0.79 11 1261 3 1 2 0 8

^top



Performance of Cylofold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Cylofold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 266
Total TN 63901
Total FP 111
Total FP CONTRA 8
Total FP INCONS 91
Total FP COMP 12
Total FN 233
Total Scores
MCC 0.621
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.627 ± 0.111
Sensitivity 0.533
Positive Predictive Value 0.729
Nr of predictions 15

^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
2KX8_A 0.94 0.89 1.00 16 845 0 0 0 0 2
2LC8_A 0.61 0.55 0.69 11 1524 5 0 5 0 9
2LKR_A - 0.50 0.44 0.59 17 6076 12 2 10 0 22
3ADB_C - 0.78 0.71 0.87 27 4155 4 0 4 0 11
3AKZ_H 0.66 0.57 0.76 16 2680 6 0 5 1 12
3AM1_B - 0.76 0.63 0.92 22 3216 2 0 2 0 13
3IZF_C 0.68 0.56 0.83 30 6867 6 0 6 0 24
3J0L_7 - 0.30 0.29 0.33 5 1210 10 0 10 0 12
3NDB_M - 0.58 0.48 0.71 29 9139 13 1 11 1 32
3NKB_B - 0.40 0.31 0.53 8 2001 7 0 7 0 18
3O58_2 0.80 0.68 0.93 26 7232 3 0 2 1 12
3O58_3 0.36 0.34 0.38 12 12371 29 5 15 9 23
3RKF_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2191 0 0 0 0 14
3U4M_B - 0.38 0.32 0.46 12 3134 14 0 14 0 25
4ENB_A 0.89 0.79 1.00 15 1260 0 0 0 0 4

^top


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