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 CentroidHomfold‑LAST - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric CentroidHomfold‑LAST Cylofold
MCC 0.581 > 0.533
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.499 ± 0.168 < 0.513 ± 0.130
Sensitivity 0.395 < 0.446
Positive Predictive Value 0.860 > 0.647
Total TP 172 < 194
Total TN 42716 > 42616
Total FP 31 < 111
Total FP CONTRA 0 < 9
Total FP INCONS 28 < 97
Total FP COMP 3 < 5
Total FN 263 > 241
P-value 1.55268413083e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of CentroidHomfold-LAST 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 CentroidHomfold‑LAST and Cylofold).

  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 CentroidHomfold‑LAST and Cylofold).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for CentroidHomfold-LAST 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 CentroidHomfold‑LAST and Cylofold).

^top





Performance of CentroidHomfold‑LAST - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for CentroidHomfold‑LAST

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 172
Total TN 42716
Total FP 31
Total FP CONTRA 0
Total FP INCONS 28
Total FP COMP 3
Total FN 263
Total Scores
MCC 0.581
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.499 ± 0.168
Sensitivity 0.395
Positive Predictive Value 0.860
Nr of predictions 16

^top



2. Individual counts for CentroidHomfold‑LAST [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LA5_A - 0.46 0.26 0.83 5 624 1 0 1 0 14
2LC8_A -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1529 11 0 11 0 20
2LKR_A - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 6101 4 0 4 0 39
3AMU_B 0.82 0.70 0.95 19 2983 3 0 1 2 8
3J0L_2 - 0.49 0.24 1.00 8 6208 0 0 0 0 25
3J0L_g - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 465 0 0 0 0 4
3J0L_7 - 0.60 0.41 0.88 7 1217 1 0 1 0 10
3J0L_a - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1125 3 0 3 0 16
3J16_L 0.75 0.57 1.00 17 2758 0 0 0 0 13
3RKF_A 0.72 0.53 1.00 18 2193 0 0 0 0 16
3SD1_A 0.64 0.45 0.90 19 3895 2 0 2 0 23
3U4M_B - 0.58 0.43 0.80 16 3140 4 0 4 0 21
3UZL_B 0.72 0.54 0.95 20 3549 1 0 1 0 17
4AOB_A 0.71 0.50 1.00 21 4350 1 0 0 1 21
4ENB_A 0.76 0.58 1.00 11 1264 0 0 0 0 8
4ENC_A 0.76 0.58 1.00 11 1315 0 0 0 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 194
Total TN 42616
Total FP 111
Total FP CONTRA 9
Total FP INCONS 97
Total FP COMP 5
Total FN 241
Total Scores
MCC 0.533
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.513 ± 0.130
Sensitivity 0.446
Positive Predictive Value 0.647
Nr of predictions 16

^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
2LA5_A - 0.46 0.26 0.83 5 624 1 0 1 0 14
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
3AMU_B 0.67 0.59 0.76 16 2982 7 0 5 2 11
3J0L_2 - 0.39 0.36 0.43 12 6188 18 2 14 2 21
3J0L_g - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 461 4 1 3 0 4
3J0L_7 - 0.30 0.29 0.33 5 1210 10 0 10 0 12
3J0L_a - 0.22 0.19 0.27 3 1117 8 1 7 0 13
3J16_L 0.75 0.57 1.00 17 2758 0 0 0 0 13
3RKF_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2191 0 0 0 0 14
3SD1_A 0.62 0.50 0.78 21 3889 6 0 6 0 21
3U4M_B - 0.38 0.32 0.46 12 3134 14 0 14 0 25
3UZL_B 0.45 0.38 0.54 14 3544 12 1 11 0 23
4AOB_A 0.35 0.26 0.48 11 4348 13 1 11 1 31
4ENB_A 0.89 0.79 1.00 15 1260 0 0 0 0 4
4ENC_A 0.86 0.79 0.94 15 1310 1 1 0 0 4

^top


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