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 RSpredict(20) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric UNAFold RSpredict(20)
MCC 0.594 > 0.559
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.605 ± 0.090 > 0.566 ± 0.099
Sensitivity 0.521 > 0.446
Positive Predictive Value 0.681 < 0.705
Total TP 483 > 413
Total TN 191315 < 191438
Total FP 292 > 207
Total FP CONTRA 32 < 42
Total FP INCONS 194 > 131
Total FP COMP 66 > 34
Total FN 444 < 514
P-value 5.10776592382e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of UNAFold and RSpredict(20). 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 RSpredict(20)).

  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 RSpredict(20)).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for UNAFold and RSpredict(20). 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 RSpredict(20)).

^top





Performance of UNAFold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for UNAFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 483
Total TN 191315
Total FP 292
Total FP CONTRA 32
Total FP INCONS 194
Total FP COMP 66
Total FN 444
Total Scores
MCC 0.594
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.605 ± 0.090
Sensitivity 0.521
Positive Predictive Value 0.681
Nr of predictions 24

^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
2WRQ_Y 0.57 0.59 0.56 10 2832 13 5 3 5 7
2XQD_Y 0.88 0.78 1.00 21 2829 0 0 0 0 6
3A2K_C 0.42 0.39 0.46 11 2902 13 2 11 0 17
3AMU_B 0.70 0.59 0.84 16 2984 5 0 3 2 11
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
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
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
3LA5_A 0.78 0.62 1.00 21 2464 0 0 0 0 13
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
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 RSpredict(20) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 413
Total TN 191438
Total FP 207
Total FP CONTRA 42
Total FP INCONS 131
Total FP COMP 34
Total FN 514
Total Scores
MCC 0.559
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.566 ± 0.099
Sensitivity 0.446
Positive Predictive Value 0.705
Nr of predictions 24

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KDQ_B 0.85 0.73 1.00 8 398 0 0 0 0 3
2WRQ_Y 0.57 0.59 0.56 10 2832 11 5 3 3 7
2XQD_Y 0.88 0.78 1.00 21 2829 0 0 0 0 6
3A2K_C 0.78 0.68 0.90 19 2905 2 0 2 0 9
3AMU_B 0.61 0.41 0.92 11 2991 1 0 1 0 16
3GX2_A 0.33 0.15 0.75 6 4363 2 0 2 0 34
3IVN_B 0.78 0.65 0.95 20 2325 1 0 1 0 11
3IZ4_A 0.53 0.43 0.65 57 70788 35 8 23 4 75
3IZF_C 0.75 0.61 0.92 33 6867 3 1 2 0 21
3JYV_7 0.77 0.63 0.95 20 2829 1 0 1 0 12
3JYX_4 0.28 0.27 0.30 9 12216 33 5 16 12 24
3JYX_3 0.61 0.56 0.68 15 6306 13 0 7 6 12
3LA5_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2465 0 0 0 0 14
3NPB_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 7015 6 1 5 0 46
3O58_2 0.76 0.76 0.76 29 7222 10 3 6 1 9
3O58_3 0.32 0.34 0.30 12 12363 28 12 16 0 23
3PDR_A 0.67 0.49 0.92 35 12842 5 0 3 2 37
3RKF_A 0.77 0.62 0.95 21 2189 1 0 1 0 13
3SD1_A 0.68 0.60 0.78 25 3884 7 1 6 0 17
4A1C_3 0.48 0.33 0.69 18 7114 8 0 8 0 36
4A1C_2 0.19 0.18 0.20 6 11751 30 6 18 6 27
4AOB_A 0.28 0.14 0.55 6 4360 5 0 5 0 36
4ENB_A 0.48 0.32 0.75 6 1267 2 0 2 0 13
4ENC_A 0.45 0.32 0.67 6 1317 3 0 3 0 13

^top


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