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 CRWrnafold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric CRWrnafold MCFold
MCC 0.455 > 0.431
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.412 ± 0.172 > 0.382 ± 0.150
Sensitivity 0.403 < 0.459
Positive Predictive Value 0.522 > 0.412
Total TP 157 < 179
Total TN 50754 > 50621
Total FP 159 < 291
Total FP CONTRA 16 < 38
Total FP INCONS 128 < 217
Total FP COMP 15 < 36
Total FN 233 > 211
P-value 2.35965341511e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

  2. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for CRWrnafold 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 CRWrnafold and MCFold).

^top





Performance of CRWrnafold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for CRWrnafold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 157
Total TN 50754
Total FP 159
Total FP CONTRA 16
Total FP INCONS 128
Total FP COMP 15
Total FN 233
Total Scores
MCC 0.455
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.412 ± 0.172
Sensitivity 0.403
Positive Predictive Value 0.522
Nr of predictions 14

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1525 15 2 13 0 20
2LKR_A - 0.52 0.44 0.63 17 6078 12 2 8 2 22
3AMU_B 0.67 0.59 0.76 16 2982 7 0 5 2 11
3J0L_g - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 461 4 1 3 0 4
3J0L_2 - 0.25 0.24 0.28 8 6187 23 2 19 2 25
3J0L_a - 0.39 0.31 0.50 5 1118 5 1 4 0 11
3J0L_7 - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1212 13 0 13 0 17
3J16_L 0.84 0.70 1.00 21 2754 0 0 0 0 9
3SD1_A 0.52 0.45 0.61 19 3885 12 2 10 0 23
3U4M_B - 0.38 0.32 0.46 12 3134 14 0 14 0 25
4A1C_2 0.13 0.15 0.13 5 11741 44 4 31 9 28
4A1C_3 0.70 0.59 0.84 32 7102 6 0 6 0 22
4ENB_A 0.70 0.58 0.85 11 1262 2 1 1 0 8
4ENC_A 0.70 0.58 0.85 11 1313 2 1 1 0 8

^top



Performance of MCFold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for MCFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 179
Total TN 50621
Total FP 291
Total FP CONTRA 38
Total FP INCONS 217
Total FP COMP 36
Total FN 211
Total Scores
MCC 0.431
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.382 ± 0.150
Sensitivity 0.459
Positive Predictive Value 0.412
Nr of predictions 14

^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
2LC8_A 0.41 0.45 0.39 9 1517 16 0 14 2 11
2LKR_A - 0.93 0.92 0.95 36 6067 14 0 2 12 3
3AMU_B 0.44 0.48 0.42 13 2972 18 2 16 0 14
3J0L_g - 0.13 0.25 0.08 1 452 12 8 4 0 3
3J0L_2 - 0.21 0.24 0.18 8 6172 39 7 29 3 25
3J0L_a - 0.16 0.19 0.17 3 1110 15 1 14 0 13
3J0L_7 - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1206 19 4 15 0 17
3J16_L 0.45 0.47 0.44 14 2743 19 1 17 1 16
3SD1_A 0.33 0.33 0.35 14 3876 26 0 26 0 28
3U4M_B - 0.59 0.59 0.59 22 3123 15 0 15 0 15
4A1C_2 0.13 0.15 0.11 5 11735 56 10 31 15 28
4A1C_3 0.68 0.67 0.71 36 7089 17 1 14 2 18
4ENB_A 0.61 0.63 0.60 12 1255 8 2 6 0 7
4ENC_A 0.28 0.32 0.27 6 1304 17 2 14 1 13

^top


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