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 MCFold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric CentroidHomfold‑LAST MCFold
MCC 0.527 > 0.432
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.463 ± 0.170 > 0.376 ± 0.147
Sensitivity 0.375 < 0.454
Positive Predictive Value 0.748 > 0.421
Total TP 166 < 201
Total TN 53674 > 53418
Total FP 64 < 313
Total FP CONTRA 5 < 39
Total FP INCONS 51 < 238
Total FP COMP 8 < 36
Total FN 277 > 242
P-value 1.22797000563e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

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

^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 166
Total TN 53674
Total FP 64
Total FP CONTRA 5
Total FP INCONS 51
Total FP COMP 8
Total FN 277
Total Scores
MCC 0.527
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.463 ± 0.170
Sensitivity 0.375
Positive Predictive Value 0.748
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
4A1C_3 0.68 0.56 0.83 30 7104 6 0 6 0 24
4A1C_2 0.16 0.15 0.18 5 11753 29 5 18 6 28
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 MCFold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for MCFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 201
Total TN 53418
Total FP 313
Total FP CONTRA 39
Total FP INCONS 238
Total FP COMP 36
Total FN 242
Total Scores
MCC 0.432
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.376 ± 0.147
Sensitivity 0.454
Positive Predictive Value 0.421
Nr of predictions 16

^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
2LA5_A - -0.03 0.00 0.00 0 615 15 0 15 0 19
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_2 - 0.21 0.24 0.18 8 6172 39 7 29 3 25
3J0L_g - 0.13 0.25 0.08 1 452 12 8 4 0 3
3J0L_7 - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1206 19 4 15 0 17
3J0L_a - 0.16 0.19 0.17 3 1110 15 1 14 0 13
3J16_L 0.45 0.47 0.44 14 2743 19 1 17 1 16
3RKF_A 0.70 0.65 0.76 22 2182 7 1 6 0 12
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_3 0.68 0.67 0.71 36 7089 17 1 14 2 18
4A1C_2 0.13 0.15 0.11 5 11735 56 10 31 15 28
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.