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 MXScarna(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

  5. Compile and download dataset for MXScarna(seed) & Afold [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric MXScarna(seed) Afold
MCC 0.625 > 0.501
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.602 ± 0.109 > 0.550 ± 0.118
Sensitivity 0.508 > 0.467
Positive Predictive Value 0.771 > 0.541
Total TP 437 > 402
Total TN 227054 > 226878
Total FP 193 < 405
Total FP CONTRA 31 < 63
Total FP INCONS 99 < 278
Total FP COMP 63 < 64
Total FN 423 < 458
P-value 5.19332990918e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of MXScarna(seed) and Afold. 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 MXScarna(seed) and Afold).

  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 MXScarna(seed) and Afold).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for MXScarna(seed) and Afold. 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 MXScarna(seed) and Afold).

^top





Performance of MXScarna(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for MXScarna(seed)

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 437
Total TN 227054
Total FP 193
Total FP CONTRA 31
Total FP INCONS 99
Total FP COMP 63
Total FN 423
Total Scores
MCC 0.625
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.602 ± 0.109
Sensitivity 0.508
Positive Predictive Value 0.771
Nr of predictions 23

^top



2. Individual counts for MXScarna(seed) [ 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
2KX8_A -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 859 2 0 2 0 18
2LC8_A -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1530 12 0 10 2 20
2WRQ_Y 0.57 0.59 0.56 10 2832 11 5 3 3 7
2ZZM_B 0.56 0.44 0.74 14 3467 5 4 1 0 18
2ZZN_D 0.86 0.74 1.00 20 2465 0 0 0 0 7
3A2K_C 0.84 0.71 1.00 20 2906 0 0 0 0 8
3A3A_A 0.77 0.65 0.92 24 3629 3 0 2 1 13
3AKZ_H 0.86 0.75 1.00 21 2680 0 0 0 0 7
3IVN_B 0.65 0.45 0.93 14 2331 1 1 0 0 17
3IYQ_A 0.45 0.38 0.54 36 60659 37 4 27 6 58
3IZ4_A 0.69 0.55 0.88 72 70794 11 3 7 1 60
3IZF_C 0.67 0.57 0.79 31 6864 9 1 7 1 23
3JYV_7 0.79 0.63 1.00 20 2830 0 0 0 0 12
3JYX_3 0.58 0.56 0.60 15 6303 21 1 9 11 12
3JYX_4 0.38 0.30 0.48 10 12225 21 3 8 10 23
3LA5_A 0.75 0.56 1.00 19 2466 0 0 0 0 15
3NPB_A 0.69 0.59 0.82 27 6988 9 2 4 3 19
3O58_2 0.79 0.79 0.79 30 7222 10 4 4 2 8
3O58_3 0.45 0.34 0.60 12 12383 19 2 6 11 23
3RKF_A 0.72 0.53 1.00 18 2193 0 0 0 0 16
4A1C_2 0.35 0.24 0.50 8 11765 20 1 7 12 25
4ENB_A 0.48 0.32 0.75 6 1267 2 0 2 0 13

^top



Performance of Afold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Afold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 402
Total TN 226878
Total FP 405
Total FP CONTRA 63
Total FP INCONS 278
Total FP COMP 64
Total FN 458
Total Scores
MCC 0.501
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.550 ± 0.118
Sensitivity 0.467
Positive Predictive Value 0.541
Nr of predictions 23

^top



2. Individual counts for Afold [ 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
2KX8_A 0.94 0.89 1.00 16 845 0 0 0 0 2
2LC8_A 0.61 0.55 0.69 11 1524 6 0 5 1 9
2WRQ_Y 0.57 0.59 0.56 10 2832 13 5 3 5 7
2ZZM_B 0.21 0.19 0.25 6 3462 18 0 18 0 26
2ZZN_D 0.80 0.74 0.87 20 2462 3 0 3 0 7
3A2K_C 0.41 0.39 0.44 11 2901 14 2 12 0 17
3A3A_A 0.84 0.70 1.00 26 3629 0 0 0 0 11
3AKZ_H 0.16 0.14 0.19 4 2680 17 2 15 0 24
3IVN_B 0.78 0.61 1.00 19 2327 0 0 0 0 12
3IYQ_A 0.31 0.34 0.29 32 60616 82 23 55 4 62
3IZ4_A 0.48 0.45 0.51 59 70760 58 11 46 1 73
3IZF_C 0.66 0.57 0.76 31 6862 10 1 9 0 23
3JYV_7 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 2827 23 1 22 0 32
3JYX_3 0.54 0.56 0.54 15 6300 24 1 12 11 12
3JYX_4 0.31 0.30 0.31 10 12214 35 5 17 13 23
3LA5_A 0.78 0.62 1.00 21 2464 0 0 0 0 13
3NPB_A 0.74 0.61 0.90 28 6990 5 0 3 2 18
3O58_2 0.66 0.66 0.66 25 7222 14 4 9 1 13
3O58_3 0.34 0.34 0.34 12 12368 37 2 21 14 23
3RKF_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2191 0 0 0 0 14
4A1C_2 0.14 0.15 0.14 5 11745 43 5 26 12 28
4ENB_A 0.67 0.58 0.79 11 1261 3 1 2 0 8

^top


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