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 Contrafold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric Multilign(seed) Contrafold
MCC 0.681 > 0.598
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.547 ± 0.131 < 0.553 ± 0.115
Sensitivity 0.649 > 0.599
Positive Predictive Value 0.717 > 0.598
Total TP 576 > 532
Total TN 406244 > 406158
Total FP 315 < 466
Total FP CONTRA 48 < 91
Total FP INCONS 179 < 266
Total FP COMP 88 < 109
Total FN 312 < 356
P-value 5.02343278931e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

  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 Contrafold).

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

^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 Contrafold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Contrafold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 532
Total TN 406158
Total FP 466
Total FP CONTRA 91
Total FP INCONS 266
Total FP COMP 109
Total FN 356
Total Scores
MCC 0.598
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.553 ± 0.115
Sensitivity 0.599
Positive Predictive Value 0.598
Nr of predictions 23

^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
RFA_00416 1.00 1.00 1.00 15 1470 3 0 0 3 0
RFA_00619 - 0.36 0.41 0.33 16 22742 45 10 23 12 23
RFA_00626 0.91 0.87 0.94 76 56535 26 1 4 21 11
RFA_00628 0.91 0.88 0.94 76 57210 25 0 5 20 10
RFA_00630 0.77 0.77 0.77 67 56866 34 6 14 14 20
RFA_00654 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 2400 15 2 13 0 18
RFA_00658 0.59 0.50 0.70 7 1118 5 0 3 2 7
RFA_00664 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 980 11 0 10 1 14
RFA_00708 0.40 0.29 0.57 4 1028 3 0 3 0 10
RFA_00767 0.74 0.56 1.00 10 1881 2 0 0 2 8
RFA_00768 0.45 0.44 0.47 8 1874 9 1 8 0 10
RFA_00769 0.54 0.56 0.53 10 1934 9 4 5 0 8
RFA_00770 0.68 0.56 0.83 10 2004 5 0 2 3 8
RFA_00773 0.71 0.56 0.91 10 1942 4 1 0 3 8
RFA_00779 0.68 0.56 0.83 10 1941 2 0 2 0 8
RFA_00808 0.68 0.56 0.82 9 2005 2 0 2 0 7
RFA_00809 0.40 0.38 0.43 6 2131 8 0 8 0 10
RFA_00816 0.72 0.73 0.71 30 23178 20 8 4 8 11
RFA_00817 0.11 0.12 0.10 5 21893 47 12 35 0 36
RFA_00818 0.57 0.61 0.53 25 20254 32 11 11 10 16
SRP_00241 0.51 0.55 0.47 45 45961 53 14 36 3 37
SRP_00331 0.52 0.54 0.50 47 37581 50 10 37 3 40
SRP_00340 0.51 0.56 0.47 46 41230 56 11 41 4 36

^top


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