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 RNASampler(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric RNASampler(20) Cylofold
MCC 0.702 > 0.661
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.704 ± 0.085 > 0.682 ± 0.122
Sensitivity 0.545 < 0.553
Positive Predictive Value 0.907 > 0.796
Total TP 223 < 226
Total TN 58152 > 58114
Total FP 37 < 73
Total FP CONTRA 4 < 11
Total FP INCONS 19 < 47
Total FP COMP 14 < 15
Total FN 186 > 183
P-value 1.42300079339e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of RNASampler(20) 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 RNASampler(20) and Cylofold).

  2. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for RNASampler(20) 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 RNASampler(20) and Cylofold).

^top





Performance of RNASampler(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 223
Total TN 58152
Total FP 37
Total FP CONTRA 4
Total FP INCONS 19
Total FP COMP 14
Total FN 186
Total Scores
MCC 0.702
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.704 ± 0.085
Sensitivity 0.545
Positive Predictive Value 0.907
Nr of predictions 11

^top



2. Individual counts for RNASampler(20) [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2XQD_Y 0.88 0.78 1.00 21 2829 0 0 0 0 6
3AMU_B 0.82 0.70 0.95 19 2983 3 0 1 2 8
3IZF_C 0.74 0.57 0.97 31 6871 1 0 1 0 23
3O58_2 0.79 0.71 0.87 27 7229 5 2 2 1 11
3O58_3 0.43 0.34 0.55 12 12381 18 2 8 8 23
3PDR_A 0.70 0.53 0.93 38 12839 5 0 3 2 34
3RKF_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2191 0 0 0 0 14
3SD1_A 0.67 0.48 0.95 20 3895 1 0 1 0 22
4AOB_A 0.58 0.40 0.85 17 4351 4 0 3 1 25
4ENB_A 0.60 0.37 1.00 7 1268 0 0 0 0 12
4ENC_A 0.76 0.58 1.00 11 1315 0 0 0 0 8

^top



Performance of Cylofold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Cylofold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 226
Total TN 58114
Total FP 73
Total FP CONTRA 11
Total FP INCONS 47
Total FP COMP 15
Total FN 183
Total Scores
MCC 0.661
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.682 ± 0.122
Sensitivity 0.553
Positive Predictive Value 0.796
Nr of predictions 11

^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
2XQD_Y 0.81 0.78 0.84 21 2825 4 4 0 0 6
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
3O58_2 0.80 0.68 0.93 26 7232 3 0 2 1 12
3O58_3 0.36 0.34 0.38 12 12371 29 5 15 9 23
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
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.