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 UNAFold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric UNAFold HotKnots
MCC 0.571 > 0.569
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.558 ± 0.068 < 0.569 ± 0.069
Sensitivity 0.500 < 0.506
Positive Predictive Value 0.655 > 0.644
Total TP 938 < 949
Total TN 338562 > 338519
Total FP 574 < 591
Total FP CONTRA 73 < 86
Total FP INCONS 420 < 439
Total FP COMP 81 > 66
Total FN 937 > 926
P-value 0.00662473470579

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of UNAFold and HotKnots. 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 UNAFold and HotKnots).

  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 UNAFold and HotKnots).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for UNAFold and HotKnots. 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 UNAFold and HotKnots).

^top





Performance of UNAFold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for UNAFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 938
Total TN 338562
Total FP 574
Total FP CONTRA 73
Total FP INCONS 420
Total FP COMP 81
Total FN 937
Total Scores
MCC 0.571
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.558 ± 0.068
Sensitivity 0.500
Positive Predictive Value 0.655
Nr of predictions 55

^top



2. Individual counts for UNAFold [ 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
2KFC_A - -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 623 7 0 7 0 20
2KRL_A - 0.76 0.60 0.96 24 5126 5 0 1 4 16
2KX8_A 0.94 0.89 1.00 16 845 0 0 0 0 2
2LA5_A - 0.39 0.26 0.63 5 622 3 1 2 0 14
2LC8_A -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1525 15 2 13 0 20
2LKR_A - 0.93 0.87 1.00 34 6071 1 0 0 1 5
2RP0_A - 0.64 0.42 1.00 5 346 0 0 0 0 7
2WRQ_Y 0.57 0.59 0.56 10 2832 13 5 3 5 7
2WW9_F - 0.59 0.60 0.60 6 290 4 0 4 0 4
2WW9_D - 0.18 0.12 0.30 3 1943 7 3 4 0 23
2WW9_E - 0.53 0.29 1.00 4 557 0 0 0 0 10
2WWQ_V 0.78 0.68 0.90 19 2905 3 0 2 1 9
2XQD_Y 0.88 0.78 1.00 21 2829 0 0 0 0 6
2ZZM_B 0.21 0.19 0.25 6 3462 18 0 18 0 26
2ZZN_D 0.84 0.78 0.91 21 2462 2 0 2 0 6
3A2K_C 0.42 0.39 0.46 11 2902 13 2 11 0 17
3A3A_A 0.87 0.76 1.00 28 3627 0 0 0 0 9
3ADB_C - 0.80 0.74 0.88 28 4154 4 0 4 0 10
3AKZ_H 0.43 0.39 0.48 11 2678 12 2 10 0 17
3AM1_B - 0.68 0.63 0.73 22 3210 8 1 7 0 13
3AMU_B 0.70 0.59 0.84 16 2984 5 0 3 2 11
3G4S_9 0.50 0.39 0.67 22 7348 11 1 10 0 35
3GCA_A - 0.54 0.29 1.00 5 523 0 0 0 0 12
3GX2_A 0.68 0.55 0.85 22 4345 5 0 4 1 18
3IVN_B 0.78 0.61 1.00 19 2327 0 0 0 0 12
3IWN_A 0.74 0.67 0.81 22 4251 6 0 5 1 11
3IYQ_A 0.31 0.33 0.28 31 60617 82 22 56 4 63
3IZ4_A 0.51 0.45 0.58 60 70772 50 4 40 6 72
3IZF_C 0.70 0.61 0.80 33 6862 8 1 7 0 21
3J0L_2 - 0.25 0.24 0.26 8 6185 25 2 21 2 25
3J0L_g - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 461 4 1 3 0 4
3J0L_7 - 0.48 0.41 0.58 7 1213 5 0 5 0 10
3J0L_a - 0.51 0.50 0.53 8 1113 7 3 4 0 8
3J16_L 0.26 0.23 0.30 7 2752 16 1 15 0 23
3JYV_7 0.22 0.19 0.29 6 2829 15 0 15 0 26
3JYX_4 0.32 0.30 0.34 10 12217 31 3 16 12 23
3JYX_3 0.62 0.63 0.61 17 6300 22 1 10 11 10
3KTW_C - 0.77 0.65 0.90 28 4529 4 2 1 1 15
3LA5_A 0.78 0.62 1.00 21 2464 0 0 0 0 13
3NDB_M - 0.84 0.74 0.96 45 9133 3 0 2 1 16
3NKB_B - 0.59 0.54 0.67 14 1995 7 0 7 0 12
3NPB_A 0.78 0.65 0.94 30 6989 5 0 2 3 16
3O58_2 0.71 0.71 0.71 27 7222 12 4 7 1 11
3O58_3 0.35 0.34 0.35 12 12369 33 1 21 11 23
3PDR_A 0.77 0.64 0.94 46 12831 5 0 3 2 26
3RKF_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2191 0 0 0 0 14
3SD1_A 0.64 0.52 0.79 22 3888 6 1 5 0 20
3U4M_B - 0.38 0.32 0.46 12 3134 14 0 14 0 25
3UZL_B 0.48 0.38 0.61 14 3547 9 0 9 0 23
4A1C_3 0.70 0.59 0.82 32 7101 7 1 6 0 22
4A1C_2 0.14 0.15 0.14 5 11745 42 5 26 11 28
4AOB_A 0.50 0.40 0.63 17 4344 11 2 8 1 25
4ENB_A 0.70 0.58 0.85 11 1262 2 1 1 0 8
4ENC_A 0.32 0.26 0.42 5 1314 7 1 6 0 14

^top



Performance of HotKnots - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for HotKnots

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 949
Total TN 338519
Total FP 591
Total FP CONTRA 86
Total FP INCONS 439
Total FP COMP 66
Total FN 926
Total Scores
MCC 0.569
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.569 ± 0.069
Sensitivity 0.506
Positive Predictive Value 0.644
Nr of predictions 55

^top



2. Individual counts for HotKnots [ 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
2KFC_A - -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 623 7 0 7 0 20
2KRL_A - 0.76 0.60 0.96 24 5126 5 0 1 4 16
2KX8_A 0.94 0.89 1.00 16 845 0 0 0 0 2
2LA5_A - 0.39 0.26 0.63 5 622 3 1 2 0 14
2LC8_A 0.61 0.55 0.69 11 1524 5 0 5 0 9
2LKR_A - 0.93 0.87 1.00 34 6071 3 0 0 3 5
2RP0_A - 0.64 0.42 1.00 5 346 0 0 0 0 7
2WRQ_Y 0.57 0.59 0.56 10 2832 13 5 3 5 7
2WW9_F - 0.59 0.60 0.60 6 290 4 0 4 0 4
2WW9_D - 0.14 0.12 0.19 3 1937 13 0 13 0 23
2WW9_E - 0.53 0.29 1.00 4 557 0 0 0 0 10
2WWQ_V 0.76 0.68 0.86 19 2904 5 0 3 2 9
2XQD_Y 0.88 0.78 1.00 21 2829 0 0 0 0 6
2ZZM_B 0.21 0.19 0.25 6 3462 18 0 18 0 26
2ZZN_D 0.82 0.78 0.88 21 2461 3 0 3 0 6
3A2K_C 0.42 0.39 0.46 11 2902 13 2 11 0 17
3A3A_A 0.87 0.76 1.00 28 3627 0 0 0 0 9
3ADB_C - 0.79 0.74 0.85 28 4153 5 0 5 0 10
3AKZ_H 0.43 0.39 0.48 11 2678 12 2 10 0 17
3AM1_B - 0.78 0.71 0.86 25 3211 4 0 4 0 10
3AMU_B 0.70 0.59 0.84 16 2984 5 0 3 2 11
3G4S_9 0.50 0.39 0.65 22 7347 12 1 11 0 35
3GCA_A - 0.54 0.29 1.00 5 523 0 0 0 0 12
3GX2_A 0.68 0.55 0.85 22 4345 5 0 4 1 18
3IVN_B 0.78 0.61 1.00 19 2327 0 0 0 0 12
3IWN_A 0.63 0.58 0.70 19 4251 9 0 8 1 14
3IYQ_A 0.31 0.34 0.29 32 60617 81 22 55 4 62
3IZ4_A 0.51 0.47 0.55 62 70763 52 10 41 1 70
3IZF_C 0.70 0.61 0.80 33 6862 8 1 7 0 21
3J0L_2 - 0.28 0.27 0.29 9 6185 23 3 19 1 24
3J0L_g - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 460 5 1 4 0 4
3J0L_7 - 0.28 0.29 0.29 5 1208 12 0 12 0 12
3J0L_a - 0.51 0.50 0.53 8 1113 7 3 4 0 8
3J16_L 0.26 0.23 0.30 7 2752 16 1 15 0 23
3JYV_7 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 2828 22 1 21 0 32
3JYX_4 0.32 0.30 0.33 10 12216 31 5 15 11 23
3JYX_3 0.62 0.63 0.61 17 6300 22 1 10 11 10
3KTW_C - 0.73 0.63 0.84 27 4528 6 2 3 1 16
3LA5_A 0.78 0.62 1.00 21 2464 0 0 0 0 13
3NDB_M - 0.84 0.74 0.96 45 9133 3 0 2 1 16
3NKB_B - 0.59 0.54 0.67 14 1995 7 0 7 0 12
3NPB_A 0.78 0.65 0.94 30 6989 5 0 2 3 16
3O58_2 0.71 0.71 0.71 27 7222 12 4 7 1 11
3O58_3 0.23 0.26 0.21 9 12360 34 10 24 0 26
3PDR_A 0.67 0.56 0.82 40 12831 11 0 9 2 32
3RKF_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2191 0 0 0 0 14
3SD1_A 0.64 0.52 0.79 22 3888 6 1 5 0 20
3U4M_B - 0.38 0.32 0.46 12 3134 14 0 14 0 25
3UZL_B 0.48 0.38 0.61 14 3547 9 0 9 0 23
4A1C_3 0.70 0.59 0.82 32 7101 7 1 6 0 22
4A1C_2 0.14 0.15 0.14 5 11745 42 6 25 11 28
4AOB_A 0.50 0.40 0.63 17 4344 11 2 8 1 25
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.