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 Vsfold5 - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

  5. Compile and download dataset for Cylofold & Vsfold5 [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric Cylofold Vsfold5
MCC 0.607 > 0.480
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.586 ± 0.088 > 0.470 ± 0.124
Sensitivity 0.512 > 0.406
Positive Predictive Value 0.727 > 0.575
Total TP 464 > 368
Total TN 111909 > 111907
Total FP 197 < 290
Total FP CONTRA 21 < 28
Total FP INCONS 153 < 244
Total FP COMP 23 > 18
Total FN 443 < 539
P-value 5.1503931209e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of Cylofold and Vsfold5. 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 Vsfold5).

  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 Vsfold5).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for Cylofold and Vsfold5. 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 Vsfold5).

^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 Vsfold5 - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Vsfold5

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 368
Total TN 111907
Total FP 290
Total FP CONTRA 28
Total FP INCONS 244
Total FP COMP 18
Total FN 539
Total Scores
MCC 0.480
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.470 ± 0.124
Sensitivity 0.406
Positive Predictive Value 0.575
Nr of predictions 28

^top



2. Individual counts for Vsfold5 [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KRL_A - 0.57 0.50 0.65 20 5120 11 5 6 0 20
2KX8_A 0.91 0.83 1.00 15 846 0 0 0 0 3
2LA5_A - -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 623 7 0 7 0 19
2LC8_A -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1527 13 0 13 0 20
2LKR_A - 0.27 0.23 0.32 9 6077 19 2 17 0 30
2XQD_Y 0.86 0.74 1.00 20 2830 0 0 0 0 7
3ADB_C - 0.67 0.53 0.87 20 4163 3 0 3 0 18
3AKZ_H 0.84 0.71 1.00 20 2681 0 0 0 0 8
3AM1_B - 0.78 0.71 0.86 25 3211 4 1 3 0 10
3AMU_B 0.67 0.59 0.76 16 2982 7 0 5 2 11
3IZF_C 0.70 0.56 0.88 30 6869 4 0 4 0 24
3J0L_a - 0.39 0.31 0.50 5 1118 5 2 3 0 11
3J0L_2 - 0.35 0.33 0.37 11 6186 21 3 16 2 22
3J0L_g - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 461 4 1 3 0 4
3J0L_7 - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1212 13 0 13 0 17
3J16_L 0.82 0.67 1.00 20 2755 0 0 0 0 10
3NDB_M - 0.06 0.05 0.08 3 9144 33 1 32 0 58
3NKB_B - 0.59 0.54 0.67 14 1995 7 0 7 0 12
3O58_3 0.39 0.37 0.41 13 12371 28 7 12 9 22
3O58_2 0.45 0.42 0.48 16 7227 19 3 14 2 22
3PDR_A 0.57 0.44 0.74 32 12837 13 0 11 2 40
3RKF_A 0.75 0.65 0.88 22 2186 3 0 3 0 12
3SD1_A 0.11 0.10 0.15 4 3890 22 0 22 0 38
3U4M_B - 0.38 0.32 0.46 12 3134 14 0 14 0 25
3UZL_B 0.16 0.14 0.20 5 3545 20 1 19 0 32
4AOB_A 0.18 0.14 0.25 6 4347 19 1 17 1 36
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.