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 Cylofold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

  4. Performance of TurboFold(20) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric Cylofold TurboFold(20)
MCC 0.653 > 0.647
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.692 ± 0.207 > 0.658 ± 0.080
Sensitivity 0.536 > 0.497
Positive Predictive Value 0.803 < 0.850
Total TP 98 > 91
Total TN 15980 < 15995
Total FP 27 > 19
Total FP CONTRA 2 < 3
Total FP INCONS 22 > 13
Total FP COMP 3 = 3
Total FN 85 < 92
P-value 0.0

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of Cylofold and TurboFold(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 Cylofold and TurboFold(20)).

  2. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for Cylofold and TurboFold(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 Cylofold and TurboFold(20)).

^top





Performance of Cylofold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Cylofold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 98
Total TN 15980
Total FP 27
Total FP CONTRA 2
Total FP INCONS 22
Total FP COMP 3
Total FN 85
Total Scores
MCC 0.653
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.692 ± 0.207
Sensitivity 0.536
Positive Predictive Value 0.803
Nr of predictions 6

^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
3AMU_B 0.67 0.59 0.76 16 2982 7 0 5 2 11
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
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



Performance of TurboFold(20) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 91
Total TN 15995
Total FP 19
Total FP CONTRA 3
Total FP INCONS 13
Total FP COMP 3
Total FN 92
Total Scores
MCC 0.647
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.658 ± 0.080
Sensitivity 0.497
Positive Predictive Value 0.850
Nr of predictions 6

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
3AMU_B 0.70 0.59 0.84 16 2984 5 0 3 2 11
3RKF_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2191 0 0 0 0 14
3SD1_A 0.59 0.48 0.74 20 3889 7 1 6 0 22
4AOB_A 0.56 0.40 0.77 17 4349 6 1 4 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


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