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 Multilign(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

  5. Compile and download dataset for Multilign(seed) & ContextFold [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric Multilign(seed) ContextFold
MCC 0.681 > 0.612
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.547 ± 0.131 < 0.572 ± 0.101
Sensitivity 0.649 > 0.592
Positive Predictive Value 0.717 > 0.633
Total TP 576 > 526
Total TN 406244 > 406216
Total FP 315 < 350
Total FP CONTRA 48 < 86
Total FP INCONS 179 < 219
Total FP COMP 88 > 45
Total FN 312 < 362
P-value 5.1503931209e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of Multilign(seed) and ContextFold. 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 Multilign(seed) and ContextFold).

  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 Multilign(seed) and ContextFold).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for Multilign(seed) and ContextFold. 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 Multilign(seed) and ContextFold).

^top





Performance of Multilign(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Multilign(seed)

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 576
Total TN 406244
Total FP 315
Total FP CONTRA 48
Total FP INCONS 179
Total FP COMP 88
Total FN 312
Total Scores
MCC 0.681
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.547 ± 0.131
Sensitivity 0.649
Positive Predictive Value 0.717
Nr of predictions 23

^top



2. Individual counts for Multilign(seed) [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
RFA_00416 0.57 0.53 0.62 8 1472 6 1 4 1 7
RFA_00619 - 0.37 0.41 0.34 16 22744 36 12 19 5 23
RFA_00626 0.90 0.85 0.95 74 56538 20 0 4 16 13
RFA_00628 0.92 0.88 0.95 76 57211 18 0 4 14 10
RFA_00630 0.83 0.80 0.86 70 56872 29 0 11 18 17
RFA_00654 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2414 1 0 1 0 18
RFA_00658 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1128 0 0 0 0 14
RFA_00664 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 990 0 0 0 0 14
RFA_00708 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1035 0 0 0 0 14
RFA_00767 0.63 0.56 0.71 10 1877 4 0 4 0 8
RFA_00768 0.61 0.56 0.67 10 1876 5 0 5 0 8
RFA_00769 0.55 0.56 0.56 10 1935 8 3 5 0 8
RFA_00770 0.68 0.56 0.83 10 2004 2 0 2 0 8
RFA_00773 0.59 0.56 0.63 10 1937 6 1 5 0 8
RFA_00779 0.61 0.56 0.67 10 1938 5 0 5 0 8
RFA_00808 0.60 0.56 0.64 9 2002 5 0 5 0 7
RFA_00809 0.37 0.38 0.38 6 2129 10 1 9 0 10
RFA_00816 1.00 1.00 1.00 41 23179 12 0 0 12 0
RFA_00817 0.77 0.78 0.76 32 21903 13 5 5 3 9
RFA_00818 0.85 0.80 0.89 33 20264 12 1 3 8 8
SRP_00241 0.48 0.50 0.46 41 45967 50 15 33 2 41
SRP_00331 0.69 0.69 0.70 60 37589 29 2 24 3 27
SRP_00340 0.59 0.61 0.57 50 41240 44 7 31 6 32

^top



Performance of ContextFold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for ContextFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 526
Total TN 406216
Total FP 350
Total FP CONTRA 86
Total FP INCONS 219
Total FP COMP 45
Total FN 362
Total Scores
MCC 0.612
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.572 ± 0.101
Sensitivity 0.592
Positive Predictive Value 0.633
Nr of predictions 23

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
RFA_00416 1.00 1.00 1.00 15 1470 1 0 0 1 0
RFA_00619 - 0.26 0.28 0.23 11 22744 40 13 23 4 28
RFA_00626 0.80 0.75 0.87 65 56541 19 1 9 9 22
RFA_00628 0.60 0.56 0.65 48 57217 28 3 23 2 38
RFA_00630 0.62 0.60 0.65 52 56873 35 3 25 7 35
RFA_00654 0.71 0.67 0.75 12 2399 5 1 3 1 6
RFA_00658 0.89 0.79 1.00 11 1117 0 0 0 0 3
RFA_00664 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 980 11 0 10 1 14
RFA_00708 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1029 6 0 6 0 14
RFA_00767 0.59 0.56 0.63 10 1875 6 3 3 0 8
RFA_00768 0.61 0.56 0.67 10 1876 5 2 3 0 8
RFA_00769 0.55 0.56 0.56 10 1935 8 4 4 0 8
RFA_00770 0.61 0.56 0.67 10 2001 5 2 3 0 8
RFA_00773 0.59 0.56 0.63 10 1937 6 1 5 0 8
RFA_00779 0.61 0.56 0.67 10 1938 5 2 3 0 8
RFA_00808 0.58 0.44 0.78 7 2007 2 0 2 0 9
RFA_00809 0.39 0.31 0.50 5 2135 6 0 5 1 11
RFA_00816 0.67 0.71 0.63 29 23174 22 13 4 5 12
RFA_00817 0.58 0.59 0.59 24 21904 17 5 12 0 17
RFA_00818 0.61 0.66 0.56 27 20253 29 10 11 8 14
SRP_00241 0.55 0.59 0.53 48 45965 44 14 29 1 34
SRP_00331 0.68 0.63 0.72 55 37599 24 1 20 3 32
SRP_00340 0.70 0.70 0.70 57 41247 26 8 16 2 25

^top


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