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 McQFold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric McQFold Mastr(20)
MCC 0.529 > 0.523
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.578 ± 0.118 > 0.511 ± 0.127
Sensitivity 0.456 > 0.348
Positive Predictive Value 0.618 < 0.790
Total TP 449 > 342
Total TN 198678 < 198972
Total FP 307 > 118
Total FP CONTRA 49 > 14
Total FP INCONS 229 > 77
Total FP COMP 29 > 27
Total FN 535 < 642
P-value 0.294741380356

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of McQFold and Mastr(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 McQFold and Mastr(20)).

  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 McQFold and Mastr(20)).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for McQFold and Mastr(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 McQFold and Mastr(20)).

^top





Performance of McQFold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for McQFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 449
Total TN 198678
Total FP 307
Total FP CONTRA 49
Total FP INCONS 229
Total FP COMP 29
Total FN 535
Total Scores
MCC 0.529
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.578 ± 0.118
Sensitivity 0.456
Positive Predictive Value 0.618
Nr of predictions 25

^top



2. Individual counts for McQFold [ 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
2WRQ_Y 0.57 0.59 0.56 10 2832 13 5 3 5 7
2XQD_Y 0.88 0.78 1.00 21 2829 0 0 0 0 6
3A2K_C 0.86 0.75 1.00 21 2905 0 0 0 0 7
3AMU_B 0.75 0.59 0.94 16 2986 3 0 1 2 11
3G4S_9 0.27 0.21 0.36 12 7348 21 1 20 0 45
3GX2_A 0.47 0.40 0.57 16 4343 13 1 11 1 24
3IVN_B 0.78 0.61 1.00 19 2327 0 0 0 0 12
3IZ4_A 0.42 0.36 0.49 47 70780 53 6 43 4 85
3IZF_C 0.68 0.56 0.83 30 6867 6 0 6 0 24
3JYV_7 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 2830 20 0 20 0 32
3JYX_3 0.21 0.22 0.20 6 6298 24 9 15 0 21
3JYX_4 0.20 0.21 0.19 7 12210 33 8 21 4 26
3LA5_A 0.78 0.62 1.00 21 2464 0 0 0 0 13
3NPB_A 0.81 0.67 0.97 31 6989 4 1 0 3 15
3O58_2 0.83 0.71 0.96 27 7232 2 0 1 1 11
3O58_3 0.26 0.26 0.26 9 12368 26 10 16 0 26
3PDR_A 0.69 0.56 0.87 40 12834 9 0 6 3 32
3RKF_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2191 0 0 0 0 14
3SD1_A 0.71 0.60 0.86 25 3887 4 0 4 0 17
4A1C_3 0.25 0.22 0.29 12 7099 29 1 28 0 42
4A1C_2 0.15 0.15 0.15 5 11748 33 5 23 5 28
4AOB_A 0.42 0.33 0.54 14 4345 13 1 11 1 28
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 Mastr(20) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 342
Total TN 198972
Total FP 118
Total FP CONTRA 14
Total FP INCONS 77
Total FP COMP 27
Total FN 642
Total Scores
MCC 0.523
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.511 ± 0.127
Sensitivity 0.348
Positive Predictive Value 0.790
Nr of predictions 25

^top



2. Individual counts for Mastr(20) [ 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
2WRQ_Y 0.57 0.59 0.56 10 2832 12 5 3 4 7
2XQD_Y 0.88 0.78 1.00 21 2829 0 0 0 0 6
3A2K_C 0.72 0.61 0.85 17 2906 3 0 3 0 11
3AMU_B 0.77 0.59 1.00 16 2987 1 0 0 1 11
3G4S_9 0.48 0.32 0.75 18 7357 8 1 5 2 39
3GX2_A 0.39 0.28 0.55 11 4351 10 0 9 1 29
3IVN_B 0.78 0.65 0.95 20 2325 1 1 0 0 11
3IZ4_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 70876 0 0 0 0 132
3IZF_C 0.73 0.63 0.85 34 6863 7 1 5 1 20
3JYV_7 0.81 0.66 1.00 21 2829 0 0 0 0 11
3JYX_3 0.56 0.56 0.58 15 6302 23 1 10 12 12
3JYX_4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 12246 0 0 0 0 33
3LA5_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2465 0 0 0 0 14
3NPB_A 0.30 0.24 0.39 11 6993 18 1 16 1 35
3O58_2 0.76 0.76 0.76 29 7222 12 3 6 3 9
3O58_3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 12403 0 0 0 0 35
3PDR_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 12880 0 0 0 0 72
3RKF_A 0.70 0.50 1.00 17 2194 0 0 0 0 17
3SD1_A 0.61 0.50 0.75 21 3888 7 1 6 0 21
4A1C_3 0.70 0.59 0.84 32 7102 7 0 6 1 22
4A1C_2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 11781 0 0 0 0 33
4AOB_A 0.39 0.26 0.58 11 4352 9 0 8 1 31
4ENB_A 0.39 0.16 1.00 3 1272 0 0 0 0 16
4ENC_A 0.51 0.26 1.00 5 1321 0 0 0 0 14

^top


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