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 ContextFold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric ContextFold HotKnots
MCC 0.601 > 0.509
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.543 ± 0.159 > 0.486 ± 0.166
Sensitivity 0.483 > 0.460
Positive Predictive Value 0.754 > 0.570
Total TP 193 > 184
Total TN 51821 > 51754
Total FP 81 < 155
Total FP CONTRA 5 < 18
Total FP INCONS 58 < 121
Total FP COMP 18 > 16
Total FN 207 < 216
P-value 2.20167918023e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of ContextFold and HotKnots. 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 ContextFold and HotKnots).

  2. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for ContextFold and HotKnots. 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 ContextFold and HotKnots).

^top





Performance of ContextFold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for ContextFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 193
Total TN 51821
Total FP 81
Total FP CONTRA 5
Total FP INCONS 58
Total FP COMP 18
Total FN 207
Total Scores
MCC 0.601
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.543 ± 0.159
Sensitivity 0.483
Positive Predictive Value 0.754
Nr of predictions 14

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.55 0.50 0.63 10 1524 6 0 6 0 10
2LKR_A - 0.65 0.56 0.76 22 6076 9 0 7 2 17
3J0L_7 - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1212 13 0 13 0 17
3J0L_2 - 0.64 0.61 0.69 20 6187 11 2 7 2 13
3J0L_g - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 462 3 1 2 0 4
3J0L_a - 0.71 0.56 0.90 9 1118 1 0 1 0 7
3J16_L 0.75 0.57 1.00 17 2758 0 0 0 0 13
3U4M_B - 0.75 0.57 1.00 21 3139 0 0 0 0 16
3UZL_B 0.72 0.54 0.95 20 3549 1 0 1 0 17
4A1C_2 0.20 0.15 0.28 5 11763 26 0 13 13 28
4A1C_3 0.78 0.63 0.97 34 7105 1 0 1 0 20
4AOB_A 0.52 0.40 0.68 17 4346 9 1 7 1 25
4ENB_A 0.69 0.47 1.00 9 1266 0 0 0 0 10
4ENC_A 0.65 0.47 0.90 9 1316 1 1 0 0 10

^top



Performance of HotKnots - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for HotKnots

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 184
Total TN 51754
Total FP 155
Total FP CONTRA 18
Total FP INCONS 121
Total FP COMP 16
Total FN 216
Total Scores
MCC 0.509
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.486 ± 0.166
Sensitivity 0.460
Positive Predictive Value 0.570
Nr of predictions 14

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.61 0.55 0.69 11 1524 5 0 5 0 9
2LKR_A - 0.93 0.87 1.00 34 6071 3 0 0 3 5
3J0L_7 - 0.28 0.29 0.29 5 1208 12 0 12 0 12
3J0L_2 - 0.28 0.27 0.29 9 6185 23 3 19 1 24
3J0L_g - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 460 5 1 4 0 4
3J0L_a - 0.51 0.50 0.53 8 1113 7 3 4 0 8
3J16_L 0.26 0.23 0.30 7 2752 16 1 15 0 23
3U4M_B - 0.38 0.32 0.46 12 3134 14 0 14 0 25
3UZL_B 0.48 0.38 0.61 14 3547 9 0 9 0 23
4A1C_2 0.14 0.15 0.14 5 11745 42 6 25 11 28
4A1C_3 0.70 0.59 0.82 32 7101 7 1 6 0 22
4AOB_A 0.50 0.40 0.63 17 4344 11 2 8 1 25
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.