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 TurboFold(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric TurboFold(20) Contrafold
MCC 0.594 > 0.561
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.602 ± 0.154 > 0.583 ± 0.166
Sensitivity 0.470 < 0.478
Positive Predictive Value 0.756 > 0.665
Total TP 127 < 129
Total TN 34855 > 34829
Total FP 53 < 76
Total FP CONTRA 3 < 12
Total FP INCONS 38 < 53
Total FP COMP 12 > 11
Total FN 143 > 141
P-value 0.0

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of TurboFold(20) and Contrafold. 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 TurboFold(20) and Contrafold).

  2. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for TurboFold(20) and Contrafold. 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 TurboFold(20) and Contrafold).

^top





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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 127
Total TN 34855
Total FP 53
Total FP CONTRA 3
Total FP INCONS 38
Total FP COMP 12
Total FN 143
Total Scores
MCC 0.594
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.602 ± 0.154
Sensitivity 0.470
Positive Predictive Value 0.756
Nr of predictions 8

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
3AMU_B 0.70 0.59 0.84 16 2984 5 0 3 2 11
3RKF_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2191 0 0 0 0 14
3SD1_A 0.59 0.48 0.74 20 3889 7 1 6 0 22
4A1C_2 0.18 0.15 0.21 5 11757 28 0 19 9 28
4A1C_3 0.69 0.57 0.84 31 7103 6 0 6 0 23
4AOB_A 0.56 0.40 0.77 17 4349 6 1 4 1 25
4ENB_A 0.69 0.47 1.00 9 1266 0 0 0 0 10
4ENC_A 0.65 0.47 0.90 9 1316 1 1 0 0 10

^top



Performance of Contrafold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Contrafold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 129
Total TN 34829
Total FP 76
Total FP CONTRA 12
Total FP INCONS 53
Total FP COMP 11
Total FN 141
Total Scores
MCC 0.561
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.583 ± 0.166
Sensitivity 0.478
Positive Predictive Value 0.665
Nr of predictions 8

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
3AMU_B 0.65 0.59 0.73 16 2981 8 0 6 2 11
3RKF_A 0.73 0.59 0.91 20 2189 2 1 1 0 14
3SD1_A 0.57 0.48 0.69 20 3887 9 2 7 0 22
4A1C_2 0.16 0.15 0.17 5 11751 33 5 20 8 28
4A1C_3 0.66 0.57 0.78 31 7100 9 1 8 0 23
4AOB_A 0.44 0.36 0.56 15 4344 13 1 11 1 27
4ENB_A 0.73 0.58 0.92 11 1263 1 1 0 0 8
4ENC_A 0.73 0.58 0.92 11 1314 1 1 0 0 8

^top


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