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 RNAwolf - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric RNAwolf NanoFolder
MCC 0.410 > 0.366
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.424 ± 0.181 > 0.390 ± 0.143
Sensitivity 0.370 < 0.376
Positive Predictive Value 0.464 > 0.364
Total TP 115 < 117
Total TN 41520 > 41447
Total FP 148 < 214
Total FP CONTRA 15 < 30
Total FP INCONS 118 < 174
Total FP COMP 15 > 10
Total FN 196 > 194
P-value 0.0

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of RNAwolf and NanoFolder. 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 RNAwolf and NanoFolder).

  2. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for RNAwolf and NanoFolder. 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 RNAwolf and NanoFolder).

^top





Performance of RNAwolf - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNAwolf

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 115
Total TN 41520
Total FP 148
Total FP CONTRA 15
Total FP INCONS 118
Total FP COMP 15
Total FN 196
Total Scores
MCC 0.410
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.424 ± 0.181
Sensitivity 0.370
Positive Predictive Value 0.464
Nr of predictions 9

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.52 0.50 0.56 10 1522 8 0 8 0 10
2LKR_A - 0.81 0.74 0.88 29 6072 8 0 4 4 10
3J16_L 0.45 0.40 0.52 12 2752 11 0 11 0 18
3U4M_B - 0.44 0.38 0.52 14 3133 13 0 13 0 23
3UZL_B 0.72 0.59 0.88 22 3545 4 1 2 1 15
4A1C_3 0.23 0.20 0.28 11 7101 28 2 26 0 43
4A1C_2 0.08 0.09 0.08 3 11741 46 10 27 9 30
4AOB_A 0.23 0.19 0.30 8 4344 20 1 18 1 34
4ENC_A 0.34 0.32 0.38 6 1310 10 1 9 0 13

^top



Performance of NanoFolder - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for NanoFolder

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 117
Total TN 41447
Total FP 214
Total FP CONTRA 30
Total FP INCONS 174
Total FP COMP 10
Total FN 194
Total Scores
MCC 0.366
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.390 ± 0.143
Sensitivity 0.376
Positive Predictive Value 0.364
Nr of predictions 9

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.52 0.55 0.50 11 1518 11 0 11 0 9
2LKR_A - 0.29 0.33 0.25 13 6054 38 8 30 0 26
3J16_L 0.36 0.37 0.37 11 2745 19 3 16 0 19
3U4M_B - 0.61 0.57 0.66 21 3128 11 1 10 0 16
3UZL_B 0.36 0.35 0.38 13 3536 21 3 18 0 24
4A1C_3 0.48 0.46 0.51 25 7091 24 2 22 0 29
4A1C_2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 11728 61 12 41 8 33
4AOB_A 0.33 0.29 0.39 12 4340 20 1 18 1 30
4ENC_A 0.57 0.58 0.58 11 1307 9 0 8 1 8

^top


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