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 IPknot - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric IPknot Cylofold
MCC 0.586 > 0.537
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.517 ± 0.153 > 0.516 ± 0.140
Sensitivity 0.474 > 0.454
Positive Predictive Value 0.732 > 0.643
Total TP 197 > 189
Total TN 42017 > 41992
Total FP 78 < 110
Total FP CONTRA 7 < 9
Total FP INCONS 65 < 96
Total FP COMP 6 > 5
Total FN 219 < 227
P-value 3.02344513449e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

  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 IPknot and Cylofold).

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

^top





Performance of IPknot - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for IPknot

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 197
Total TN 42017
Total FP 78
Total FP CONTRA 7
Total FP INCONS 65
Total FP COMP 6
Total FN 219
Total Scores
MCC 0.586
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.517 ± 0.153
Sensitivity 0.474
Positive Predictive Value 0.732
Nr of predictions 15

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.40 0.30 0.55 6 1529 5 1 4 0 14
2LKR_A - 0.84 0.77 0.91 30 6072 4 0 3 1 9
3AMU_B 0.70 0.59 0.84 16 2984 5 0 3 2 11
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_a - 0.21 0.19 0.25 3 1116 9 1 8 0 13
3J0L_7 - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1218 7 0 7 0 17
3J16_L 0.75 0.57 1.00 17 2758 0 0 0 0 13
3RKF_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2191 0 0 0 0 14
3SD1_A 0.61 0.48 0.80 20 3891 5 0 5 0 22
3U4M_B - 0.68 0.54 0.87 20 3137 3 1 2 0 17
3UZL_B 0.72 0.54 0.95 20 3549 1 0 1 0 17
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 0.52 0.42 0.67 8 1314 4 0 4 0 11

^top



Performance of Cylofold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Cylofold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 189
Total TN 41992
Total FP 110
Total FP CONTRA 9
Total FP INCONS 96
Total FP COMP 5
Total FN 227
Total Scores
MCC 0.537
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.516 ± 0.140
Sensitivity 0.454
Positive Predictive Value 0.643
Nr of predictions 15

^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
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
3AMU_B 0.67 0.59 0.76 16 2982 7 0 5 2 11
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_a - 0.22 0.19 0.27 3 1117 8 1 7 0 13
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
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


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