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 RNASLOpt - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric UNAFold RNASLOpt
MCC 0.451 > 0.443
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.402 ± 0.156 < 0.409 ± 0.141
Sensitivity 0.400 > 0.365
Positive Predictive Value 0.516 < 0.547
Total TP 160 > 146
Total TN 51767 < 51810
Total FP 165 > 130
Total FP CONTRA 19 > 15
Total FP INCONS 131 > 106
Total FP COMP 15 > 9
Total FN 240 < 254
P-value 0.013974662571

^top




Performance plots


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

  2. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for UNAFold and RNASLOpt. 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 RNASLOpt).

^top





Performance of UNAFold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for UNAFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 160
Total TN 51767
Total FP 165
Total FP CONTRA 19
Total FP INCONS 131
Total FP COMP 15
Total FN 240
Total Scores
MCC 0.451
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.402 ± 0.156
Sensitivity 0.400
Positive Predictive Value 0.516
Nr of predictions 14

^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
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
3J0L_7 - 0.48 0.41 0.58 7 1213 5 0 5 0 10
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_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
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_2 0.14 0.15 0.14 5 11745 42 5 26 11 28
4A1C_3 0.70 0.59 0.82 32 7101 7 1 6 0 22
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 RNASLOpt - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNASLOpt

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 146
Total TN 51810
Total FP 130
Total FP CONTRA 15
Total FP INCONS 106
Total FP COMP 9
Total FN 254
Total Scores
MCC 0.443
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.409 ± 0.141
Sensitivity 0.365
Positive Predictive Value 0.547
Nr of predictions 14

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.47 0.35 0.64 7 1529 4 0 4 0 13
2LKR_A - 0.68 0.62 0.75 24 6073 9 0 8 1 15
3J0L_7 - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1212 13 0 13 0 17
3J0L_2 - 0.39 0.36 0.43 12 6188 18 2 14 2 21
3J0L_g - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 461 4 1 3 0 4
3J0L_a - 0.26 0.19 0.38 3 1120 5 1 4 0 13
3J16_L 0.53 0.40 0.71 12 2758 5 0 5 0 18
3U4M_B - 0.38 0.32 0.46 12 3134 14 0 14 0 25
3UZL_B 0.48 0.32 0.71 12 3553 5 0 5 0 25
4A1C_2 0.23 0.24 0.22 8 11744 35 8 21 6 25
4A1C_3 0.67 0.52 0.88 28 7108 4 0 4 0 26
4AOB_A 0.26 0.19 0.38 8 4350 13 2 11 0 34
4ENB_A 0.76 0.58 1.00 11 1264 0 0 0 0 8
4ENC_A 0.65 0.47 0.90 9 1316 1 1 0 0 10

^top


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