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 RSpredict(20) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric Contrafold RSpredict(20)
MCC 0.569 > 0.559
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.581 ± 0.103 > 0.566 ± 0.099
Sensitivity 0.503 > 0.446
Positive Predictive Value 0.647 < 0.705
Total TP 466 > 413
Total TN 191304 < 191438
Total FP 291 > 207
Total FP CONTRA 44 > 42
Total FP INCONS 210 > 131
Total FP COMP 37 > 34
Total FN 461 < 514
P-value 3.54044765699e-05

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of Contrafold and RSpredict(20). 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 RSpredict(20)).

  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 RSpredict(20)).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for Contrafold and RSpredict(20). 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 RSpredict(20)).

^top





Performance of Contrafold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Contrafold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 466
Total TN 191304
Total FP 291
Total FP CONTRA 44
Total FP INCONS 210
Total FP COMP 37
Total FN 461
Total Scores
MCC 0.569
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.581 ± 0.103
Sensitivity 0.503
Positive Predictive Value 0.647
Nr of predictions 24

^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
2WRQ_Y 0.57 0.59 0.56 10 2832 13 5 3 5 7
2XQD_Y 0.78 0.70 0.86 19 2828 3 0 3 0 8
3A2K_C 0.44 0.43 0.46 12 2900 14 2 12 0 16
3AMU_B 0.65 0.59 0.73 16 2981 8 0 6 2 11
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
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
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
3LA5_A 0.78 0.62 1.00 21 2464 0 0 0 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
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 RSpredict(20) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RSpredict(20)

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 413
Total TN 191438
Total FP 207
Total FP CONTRA 42
Total FP INCONS 131
Total FP COMP 34
Total FN 514
Total Scores
MCC 0.559
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.566 ± 0.099
Sensitivity 0.446
Positive Predictive Value 0.705
Nr of predictions 24

^top



2. Individual counts for RSpredict(20) [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KDQ_B 0.85 0.73 1.00 8 398 0 0 0 0 3
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 0.78 0.68 0.90 19 2905 2 0 2 0 9
3AMU_B 0.61 0.41 0.92 11 2991 1 0 1 0 16
3GX2_A 0.33 0.15 0.75 6 4363 2 0 2 0 34
3IVN_B 0.78 0.65 0.95 20 2325 1 0 1 0 11
3IZ4_A 0.53 0.43 0.65 57 70788 35 8 23 4 75
3IZF_C 0.75 0.61 0.92 33 6867 3 1 2 0 21
3JYV_7 0.77 0.63 0.95 20 2829 1 0 1 0 12
3JYX_4 0.28 0.27 0.30 9 12216 33 5 16 12 24
3JYX_3 0.61 0.56 0.68 15 6306 13 0 7 6 12
3LA5_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2465 0 0 0 0 14
3NPB_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 7015 6 1 5 0 46
3O58_2 0.76 0.76 0.76 29 7222 10 3 6 1 9
3O58_3 0.32 0.34 0.30 12 12363 28 12 16 0 23
3PDR_A 0.67 0.49 0.92 35 12842 5 0 3 2 37
3RKF_A 0.77 0.62 0.95 21 2189 1 0 1 0 13
3SD1_A 0.68 0.60 0.78 25 3884 7 1 6 0 17
4A1C_3 0.48 0.33 0.69 18 7114 8 0 8 0 36
4A1C_2 0.19 0.18 0.20 6 11751 30 6 18 6 27
4AOB_A 0.28 0.14 0.55 6 4360 5 0 5 0 36
4ENB_A 0.48 0.32 0.75 6 1267 2 0 2 0 13
4ENC_A 0.45 0.32 0.67 6 1317 3 0 3 0 13

^top


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