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 UNAFold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric CentroidAlifold(20) UNAFold
MCC 0.695 > 0.589
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.693 ± 0.065 > 0.590 ± 0.088
Sensitivity 0.540 > 0.516
Positive Predictive Value 0.897 > 0.677
Total TP 495 > 473
Total TN 191066 > 190919
Total FP 88 < 292
Total FP CONTRA 13 < 32
Total FP INCONS 44 < 194
Total FP COMP 31 < 66
Total FN 421 < 443
P-value 4.94031556815e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

  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 UNAFold).

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

^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 UNAFold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for UNAFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 473
Total TN 190919
Total FP 292
Total FP CONTRA 32
Total FP INCONS 194
Total FP COMP 66
Total FN 443
Total Scores
MCC 0.589
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.590 ± 0.088
Sensitivity 0.516
Positive Predictive Value 0.677
Nr of predictions 23

^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
2WRQ_Y 0.57 0.59 0.56 10 2832 13 5 3 5 7
2XQD_Y 0.88 0.78 1.00 21 2829 0 0 0 0 6
3A2K_C 0.42 0.39 0.46 11 2902 13 2 11 0 17
3AMU_B 0.70 0.59 0.84 16 2984 5 0 3 2 11
3GX2_A 0.68 0.55 0.85 22 4345 5 0 4 1 18
3IVN_B 0.78 0.61 1.00 19 2327 0 0 0 0 12
3IZ4_A 0.51 0.45 0.58 60 70772 50 4 40 6 72
3IZF_C 0.70 0.61 0.80 33 6862 8 1 7 0 21
3JYV_7 0.22 0.19 0.29 6 2829 15 0 15 0 26
3JYX_4 0.32 0.30 0.34 10 12217 31 3 16 12 23
3JYX_3 0.62 0.63 0.61 17 6300 22 1 10 11 10
3LA5_A 0.78 0.62 1.00 21 2464 0 0 0 0 13
3NPB_A 0.78 0.65 0.94 30 6989 5 0 2 3 16
3O58_3 0.35 0.34 0.35 12 12369 33 1 21 11 23
3O58_2 0.71 0.71 0.71 27 7222 12 4 7 1 11
3PDR_A 0.77 0.64 0.94 46 12831 5 0 3 2 26
3RKF_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2191 0 0 0 0 14
3SD1_A 0.64 0.52 0.79 22 3888 6 1 5 0 20
4A1C_3 0.70 0.59 0.82 32 7101 7 1 6 0 22
4A1C_2 0.14 0.15 0.14 5 11745 42 5 26 11 28
4AOB_A 0.50 0.40 0.63 17 4344 11 2 8 1 25
4ENB_A 0.70 0.58 0.85 11 1262 2 1 1 0 8
4ENC_A 0.32 0.26 0.42 5 1314 7 1 6 0 14

^top


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