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 CentroidAlifold(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric CentroidAlifold(20) Contrafold
MCC 0.695 > 0.564
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.693 ± 0.065 > 0.565 ± 0.102
Sensitivity 0.540 > 0.498
Positive Predictive Value 0.897 > 0.642
Total TP 495 > 456
Total TN 191066 > 190908
Total FP 88 < 291
Total FP CONTRA 13 < 44
Total FP INCONS 44 < 210
Total FP COMP 31 < 37
Total FN 421 < 460
P-value 5.19332990918e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of CentroidAlifold(20) and Contrafold. 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 CentroidAlifold(20) and Contrafold).

  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 CentroidAlifold(20) and Contrafold).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for CentroidAlifold(20) and Contrafold. 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 CentroidAlifold(20) and Contrafold).

^top





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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 495
Total TN 191066
Total FP 88
Total FP CONTRA 13
Total FP INCONS 44
Total FP COMP 31
Total FN 421
Total Scores
MCC 0.695
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.693 ± 0.065
Sensitivity 0.540
Positive Predictive Value 0.897
Nr of predictions 23

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2WRQ_Y 0.57 0.59 0.56 10 2832 11 5 3 3 7
2XQD_Y 0.88 0.78 1.00 21 2829 0 0 0 0 6
3A2K_C 0.86 0.75 1.00 21 2905 0 0 0 0 7
3AMU_B 0.86 0.74 1.00 20 2983 1 0 0 1 7
3GX2_A 0.77 0.60 1.00 24 4347 1 0 0 1 16
3IVN_B 0.78 0.65 0.95 20 2325 1 1 0 0 11
3IZ4_A 0.58 0.39 0.88 51 70818 7 3 4 0 81
3IZF_C 0.75 0.61 0.92 33 6867 4 0 3 1 21
3JYV_7 0.81 0.66 1.00 21 2829 0 0 0 0 11
3JYX_4 0.39 0.27 0.56 9 12230 9 0 7 2 24
3JYX_3 0.61 0.56 0.68 15 6306 20 0 7 13 12
3LA5_A 0.78 0.62 1.00 21 2464 0 0 0 0 13
3NPB_A 0.70 0.54 0.89 25 6993 5 1 2 2 21
3O58_3 0.54 0.31 0.92 11 12391 1 0 1 0 24
3O58_2 0.78 0.76 0.81 29 7224 9 2 5 2 9
3PDR_A 0.76 0.63 0.94 45 12832 5 0 3 2 27
3RKF_A 0.72 0.53 1.00 18 2193 0 0 0 0 16
3SD1_A 0.71 0.52 0.96 22 3893 1 0 1 0 20
4A1C_3 0.76 0.63 0.92 34 7103 4 0 3 1 20
4A1C_2 0.26 0.15 0.45 5 11770 8 1 5 2 28
4AOB_A 0.75 0.57 1.00 24 4347 1 0 0 1 18
4ENB_A 0.69 0.47 1.00 9 1266 0 0 0 0 10
4ENC_A 0.60 0.37 1.00 7 1319 0 0 0 0 12

^top



Performance of Contrafold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Contrafold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 456
Total TN 190908
Total FP 291
Total FP CONTRA 44
Total FP INCONS 210
Total FP COMP 37
Total FN 460
Total Scores
MCC 0.564
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.565 ± 0.102
Sensitivity 0.498
Positive Predictive Value 0.642
Nr of predictions 23

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2WRQ_Y 0.57 0.59 0.56 10 2832 13 5 3 5 7
2XQD_Y 0.78 0.70 0.86 19 2828 3 0 3 0 8
3A2K_C 0.44 0.43 0.46 12 2900 14 2 12 0 16
3AMU_B 0.65 0.59 0.73 16 2981 8 0 6 2 11
3GX2_A 0.77 0.63 0.96 25 4345 2 0 1 1 15
3IVN_B 0.78 0.61 1.00 19 2327 0 0 0 0 12
3IZ4_A 0.52 0.45 0.61 60 70777 44 4 35 5 72
3IZF_C 0.68 0.61 0.77 33 6860 10 1 9 0 21
3JYV_7 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 2830 20 0 20 0 32
3JYX_4 0.20 0.21 0.20 7 12211 35 6 22 7 26
3JYX_3 0.28 0.30 0.27 8 6298 23 8 14 1 19
3LA5_A 0.78 0.62 1.00 21 2464 0 0 0 0 13
3NPB_A 0.76 0.70 0.84 32 6983 8 1 5 2 14
3O58_3 0.28 0.26 0.31 9 12374 20 3 17 0 26
3O58_2 0.78 0.76 0.81 29 7224 10 2 5 3 9
3PDR_A 0.69 0.60 0.80 43 12826 13 0 11 2 29
3RKF_A 0.73 0.59 0.91 20 2189 2 1 1 0 14
3SD1_A 0.57 0.48 0.69 20 3887 9 2 7 0 22
4A1C_3 0.66 0.57 0.78 31 7100 9 1 8 0 23
4A1C_2 0.16 0.15 0.17 5 11751 33 5 20 8 28
4AOB_A 0.44 0.36 0.56 15 4344 13 1 11 1 27
4ENB_A 0.73 0.58 0.92 11 1263 1 1 0 0 8
4ENC_A 0.73 0.58 0.92 11 1314 1 1 0 0 8

^top


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