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 Vsfold4 - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

  5. Compile and download dataset for Cylofold & Vsfold4 [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric Cylofold Vsfold4
MCC 0.607 > 0.529
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.586 ± 0.088 > 0.528 ± 0.102
Sensitivity 0.512 > 0.441
Positive Predictive Value 0.727 > 0.642
Total TP 464 > 400
Total TN 111909 < 111924
Total FP 197 < 242
Total FP CONTRA 21 = 21
Total FP INCONS 153 < 202
Total FP COMP 23 > 19
Total FN 443 < 507
P-value 4.69811216434e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of Cylofold and Vsfold4. 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 Vsfold4).

  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 Cylofold and Vsfold4).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for Cylofold and Vsfold4. 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 Vsfold4).

^top





Performance of Cylofold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Cylofold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 464
Total TN 111909
Total FP 197
Total FP CONTRA 21
Total FP INCONS 153
Total FP COMP 23
Total FN 443
Total Scores
MCC 0.607
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.586 ± 0.088
Sensitivity 0.512
Positive Predictive Value 0.727
Nr of predictions 28

^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
2KRL_A - 0.72 0.60 0.86 24 5123 8 2 2 4 16
2KX8_A 0.94 0.89 1.00 16 845 0 0 0 0 2
2LA5_A - 0.46 0.26 0.83 5 624 1 0 1 0 14
2LC8_A 0.61 0.55 0.69 11 1524 5 0 5 0 9
2LKR_A - 0.50 0.44 0.59 17 6076 12 2 10 0 22
2XQD_Y 0.81 0.78 0.84 21 2825 4 4 0 0 6
3ADB_C - 0.78 0.71 0.87 27 4155 4 0 4 0 11
3AKZ_H 0.66 0.57 0.76 16 2680 6 0 5 1 12
3AM1_B - 0.76 0.63 0.92 22 3216 2 0 2 0 13
3AMU_B 0.67 0.59 0.76 16 2982 7 0 5 2 11
3IZF_C 0.68 0.56 0.83 30 6867 6 0 6 0 24
3J0L_a - 0.22 0.19 0.27 3 1117 8 1 7 0 13
3J0L_2 - 0.39 0.36 0.43 12 6188 18 2 14 2 21
3J0L_g - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 461 4 1 3 0 4
3J0L_7 - 0.30 0.29 0.33 5 1210 10 0 10 0 12
3J16_L 0.75 0.57 1.00 17 2758 0 0 0 0 13
3NDB_M - 0.58 0.48 0.71 29 9139 13 1 11 1 32
3NKB_B - 0.40 0.31 0.53 8 2001 7 0 7 0 18
3O58_3 0.36 0.34 0.38 12 12371 29 5 15 9 23
3O58_2 0.80 0.68 0.93 26 7232 3 0 2 1 12
3PDR_A 0.72 0.54 0.95 39 12839 4 0 2 2 33
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
3U4M_B - 0.38 0.32 0.46 12 3134 14 0 14 0 25
3UZL_B 0.45 0.38 0.54 14 3544 12 1 11 0 23
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 Vsfold4 - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Vsfold4

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 400
Total TN 111924
Total FP 242
Total FP CONTRA 21
Total FP INCONS 202
Total FP COMP 19
Total FN 507
Total Scores
MCC 0.529
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.528 ± 0.102
Sensitivity 0.441
Positive Predictive Value 0.642
Nr of predictions 28

^top



2. Individual counts for Vsfold4 [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KRL_A - 0.65 0.53 0.81 21 5125 7 0 5 2 19
2KX8_A 0.94 0.89 1.00 16 845 0 0 0 0 2
2LA5_A - 0.46 0.26 0.83 5 624 1 0 1 0 14
2LC8_A -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1527 13 0 13 0 20
2LKR_A - 0.31 0.28 0.34 11 6073 21 3 18 0 28
2XQD_Y 0.86 0.74 1.00 20 2830 0 0 0 0 7
3ADB_C - 0.89 0.79 1.00 30 4156 0 0 0 0 8
3AKZ_H 0.67 0.57 0.80 16 2681 5 1 3 1 12
3AM1_B - 0.84 0.71 1.00 25 3215 0 0 0 0 10
3AMU_B 0.64 0.56 0.75 15 2983 7 0 5 2 12
3IZF_C 0.69 0.56 0.86 30 6868 5 0 5 0 24
3J0L_a - 0.39 0.31 0.50 5 1118 5 2 3 0 11
3J0L_2 - 0.38 0.36 0.41 12 6187 18 3 14 1 21
3J0L_g - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 461 4 1 3 0 4
3J0L_7 - 0.51 0.41 0.64 7 1214 4 0 4 0 10
3J16_L 0.82 0.67 1.00 20 2755 0 0 0 0 10
3NDB_M - 0.28 0.23 0.35 14 9140 26 0 26 0 47
3NKB_B - 0.59 0.54 0.67 14 1995 7 0 7 0 12
3O58_3 0.09 0.09 0.10 3 12373 35 5 22 8 32
3O58_2 0.47 0.42 0.53 16 7230 16 3 11 2 22
3PDR_A 0.57 0.44 0.74 32 12837 13 0 11 2 40
3RKF_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2191 0 0 0 0 14
3SD1_A 0.19 0.17 0.24 7 3887 22 1 21 0 35
3U4M_B - 0.38 0.32 0.46 12 3134 14 0 14 0 25
3UZL_B 0.53 0.41 0.71 15 3549 6 1 5 0 22
4AOB_A 0.42 0.33 0.54 14 4345 13 1 11 1 28
4ENB_A 0.76 0.58 1.00 11 1264 0 0 0 0 8
4ENC_A 0.69 0.47 1.00 9 1317 0 0 0 0 10

^top


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