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 Contrafold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric Contrafold RNAshapes
MCC 0.568 > 0.539
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.556 ± 0.068 > 0.531 ± 0.068
Sensitivity 0.498 > 0.470
Positive Predictive Value 0.653 > 0.622
Total TP 933 > 882
Total TN 338564 < 338576
Total FP 553 < 618
Total FP CONTRA 84 > 75
Total FP INCONS 412 < 460
Total FP COMP 57 < 83
Total FN 942 < 993
P-value 3.56938820447e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of Contrafold and RNAshapes. 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 Contrafold and RNAshapes).

  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 Contrafold and RNAshapes).

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

^top





Performance of Contrafold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Contrafold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 933
Total TN 338564
Total FP 553
Total FP CONTRA 84
Total FP INCONS 412
Total FP COMP 57
Total FN 942
Total Scores
MCC 0.568
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.556 ± 0.068
Sensitivity 0.498
Positive Predictive Value 0.653
Nr of predictions 55

^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
2KDQ_B 0.95 0.91 1.00 10 396 0 0 0 0 1
2KFC_A - 0.45 0.25 0.83 5 624 1 0 1 0 15
2KRL_A - 0.76 0.60 0.96 24 5126 5 0 1 4 16
2KX8_A 0.94 0.89 1.00 16 845 0 0 0 0 2
2LA5_A - 0.39 0.26 0.63 5 622 3 1 2 0 14
2LC8_A 0.45 0.35 0.58 7 1528 5 2 3 0 13
2LKR_A - 0.84 0.79 0.89 31 6070 6 0 4 2 8
2RP0_A - 0.64 0.42 1.00 5 346 0 0 0 0 7
2WRQ_Y 0.57 0.59 0.56 10 2832 13 5 3 5 7
2WW9_F - 0.59 0.60 0.60 6 290 4 0 4 0 4
2WW9_D - 0.39 0.23 0.67 6 1944 3 2 1 0 20
2WW9_E - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 561 0 0 0 0 14
2WWQ_V 0.78 0.68 0.90 19 2905 4 0 2 2 9
2XQD_Y 0.78 0.70 0.86 19 2828 3 0 3 0 8
2ZZM_B 0.53 0.47 0.60 15 3461 10 2 8 0 17
2ZZN_D 0.82 0.78 0.88 21 2461 3 0 3 0 6
3A2K_C 0.44 0.43 0.46 12 2900 14 2 12 0 16
3A3A_A 0.87 0.76 1.00 28 3627 0 0 0 0 9
3ADB_C - 0.92 0.84 1.00 32 4154 0 0 0 0 6
3AKZ_H 0.39 0.39 0.41 11 2674 17 4 12 1 17
3AM1_B - 0.68 0.63 0.73 22 3210 8 1 7 0 13
3AMU_B 0.65 0.59 0.73 16 2981 8 0 6 2 11
3G4S_9 0.30 0.25 0.38 14 7344 23 1 22 0 43
3GCA_A - 0.49 0.29 0.83 5 522 1 0 1 0 12
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
3IWN_A 0.80 0.67 0.96 22 4255 1 0 1 0 11
3IYQ_A 0.34 0.37 0.32 35 60615 80 21 55 4 59
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
3J0L_2 - 0.25 0.24 0.28 8 6187 26 0 21 5 25
3J0L_g - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 464 1 1 0 0 4
3J0L_7 - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1218 7 0 7 0 17
3J0L_a - 0.50 0.44 0.58 7 1116 5 2 3 0 9
3J16_L 0.46 0.40 0.55 12 2753 10 1 9 0 18
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
3KTW_C - 0.44 0.40 0.50 17 4526 18 2 15 1 26
3LA5_A 0.78 0.62 1.00 21 2464 0 0 0 0 13
3NDB_M - 0.81 0.72 0.92 44 9132 5 0 4 1 17
3NKB_B - 0.54 0.50 0.59 13 1994 9 0 9 0 13
3NPB_A 0.76 0.70 0.84 32 6983 8 1 5 2 14
3O58_2 0.78 0.76 0.81 29 7224 10 2 5 3 9
3O58_3 0.28 0.26 0.31 9 12374 20 3 17 0 26
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
3U4M_B - 0.59 0.46 0.77 17 3138 5 0 5 0 20
3UZL_B 0.70 0.54 0.91 20 3548 2 0 2 0 17
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



Performance of RNAshapes - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNAshapes

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 882
Total TN 338576
Total FP 618
Total FP CONTRA 75
Total FP INCONS 460
Total FP COMP 83
Total FN 993
Total Scores
MCC 0.539
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.531 ± 0.068
Sensitivity 0.470
Positive Predictive Value 0.622
Nr of predictions 55

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KDQ_B 0.95 0.91 1.00 10 396 0 0 0 0 1
2KFC_A - -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 623 7 0 7 0 20
2KRL_A - 0.76 0.60 0.96 24 5126 5 0 1 4 16
2KX8_A 0.91 0.83 1.00 15 846 0 0 0 0 3
2LA5_A - 0.39 0.26 0.63 5 622 3 1 2 0 14
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 1 0 0 1 5
2RP0_A - 0.64 0.42 1.00 5 346 0 0 0 0 7
2WRQ_Y 0.59 0.59 0.59 10 2833 12 4 3 5 7
2WW9_F - 0.59 0.60 0.60 6 290 4 0 4 0 4
2WW9_D - 0.16 0.12 0.25 3 1941 9 4 5 0 23
2WW9_E - 0.53 0.29 1.00 4 557 0 0 0 0 10
2WWQ_V 0.76 0.68 0.86 19 2904 5 0 3 2 9
2XQD_Y 0.64 0.56 0.75 15 2830 5 0 5 0 12
2ZZM_B 0.10 0.09 0.12 3 3460 23 0 23 0 29
2ZZN_D 0.69 0.63 0.77 17 2463 5 1 4 0 10
3A2K_C 0.42 0.39 0.46 11 2902 13 2 11 0 17
3A3A_A 0.76 0.65 0.89 24 3628 3 0 3 0 13
3ADB_C - 0.67 0.61 0.74 23 4155 8 0 8 0 15
3AKZ_H 0.68 0.61 0.77 17 2679 6 1 4 1 11
3AM1_B - 0.64 0.60 0.70 21 3210 9 1 8 0 14
3AMU_B 0.70 0.59 0.84 16 2984 5 0 3 2 11
3G4S_9 0.41 0.32 0.53 18 7347 16 1 15 0 39
3GCA_A - 0.54 0.29 1.00 5 523 0 0 0 0 12
3GX2_A 0.76 0.63 0.93 25 4344 3 0 2 1 15
3IVN_B 0.78 0.61 1.00 19 2327 0 0 0 0 12
3IWN_A 0.76 0.67 0.88 22 4253 3 0 3 0 11
3IYQ_A 0.26 0.28 0.24 26 60619 83 21 60 2 68
3IZ4_A 0.52 0.45 0.60 60 70776 45 6 34 5 72
3IZF_C 0.59 0.52 0.68 28 6862 13 1 12 0 26
3J0L_2 - 0.38 0.36 0.40 12 6186 20 3 15 2 21
3J0L_g - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 461 4 1 3 0 4
3J0L_7 - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1213 12 0 12 0 17
3J0L_a - 0.23 0.19 0.30 3 1118 7 1 6 0 13
3J16_L 0.50 0.40 0.63 12 2756 7 0 7 0 18
3JYV_7 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 2830 20 0 20 0 32
3JYX_4 0.31 0.30 0.31 10 12214 35 5 17 13 23
3JYX_3 0.63 0.63 0.63 17 6301 21 1 9 11 10
3KTW_C - 0.39 0.35 0.45 15 4527 19 1 17 1 28
3LA5_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2465 0 0 0 0 14
3NDB_M - 0.82 0.72 0.94 44 9133 4 0 3 1 17
3NKB_B - 0.61 0.54 0.70 14 1996 6 0 6 0 12
3NPB_A 0.77 0.63 0.94 29 6990 4 1 1 2 17
3O58_2 0.60 0.61 0.59 23 7221 18 4 12 2 15
3O58_3 0.34 0.34 0.34 12 12368 37 2 21 14 23
3PDR_A 0.67 0.56 0.80 40 12830 12 0 10 2 32
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
3U4M_B - 0.38 0.32 0.46 12 3134 14 0 14 0 25
3UZL_B 0.39 0.32 0.48 12 3545 13 2 11 0 25
4A1C_3 0.68 0.57 0.82 31 7102 7 1 6 0 23
4A1C_2 0.14 0.15 0.14 5 11746 41 5 25 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.