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 TurboFold(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric TurboFold(seed) RDfolder
MCC 0.720 > 0.512
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.728 ± 0.113 > 0.515 ± 0.129
Sensitivity 0.663 > 0.453
Positive Predictive Value 0.786 > 0.588
Total TP 265 > 181
Total TN 49572 < 49601
Total FP 117 < 150
Total FP CONTRA 13 < 29
Total FP INCONS 59 < 98
Total FP COMP 45 > 23
Total FN 135 < 219
P-value 5.10776592382e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of TurboFold(seed) and RDfolder. 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 TurboFold(seed) and RDfolder).

  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 TurboFold(seed) and RDfolder).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for TurboFold(seed) and RDfolder. 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 TurboFold(seed) and RDfolder).

^top





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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 265
Total TN 49572
Total FP 117
Total FP CONTRA 13
Total FP INCONS 59
Total FP COMP 45
Total FN 135
Total Scores
MCC 0.720
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.728 ± 0.113
Sensitivity 0.663
Positive Predictive Value 0.786
Nr of predictions 24

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
PDB_00012 1.00 1.00 1.00 7 399 3 0 0 3 0
RFA_00390 1.00 1.00 1.00 15 1416 2 0 0 2 0
RFA_00416 1.00 1.00 1.00 15 1470 2 0 0 2 0
RFA_00433 1.00 1.00 1.00 15 1416 2 0 0 2 0
RFA_00587 1.00 1.00 1.00 15 4836 11 0 0 11 0
RFA_00636 0.42 0.43 0.43 12 3977 16 2 14 0 16
RFA_00654 0.44 0.33 0.60 6 2405 5 1 3 1 12
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_00703 0.67 0.64 0.69 9 4265 18 1 3 14 5
RFA_00708 0.40 0.29 0.57 4 1028 3 0 3 0 10
RFA_00749 1.00 1.00 1.00 12 891 1 0 0 1 0
RFA_00764 1.00 1.00 1.00 12 891 1 0 0 1 0
RFA_00765 1.00 1.00 1.00 12 891 1 0 0 1 0
RFA_00767 0.74 0.56 1.00 10 1881 0 0 0 0 8
RFA_00768 0.74 0.56 1.00 10 1881 0 0 0 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 5 0 2 3 8
RFA_00773 0.71 0.56 0.91 10 1942 2 1 0 1 8
RFA_00779 0.71 0.56 0.91 10 1942 1 0 1 0 8
RFA_00808 0.75 0.56 1.00 9 2007 0 0 0 0 7
RFA_00809 0.38 0.38 0.40 6 2130 9 1 8 0 10
SRP_00137 0.75 0.84 0.68 21 4155 10 4 6 0 4
SRP_00285 0.95 0.93 0.97 28 3712 1 0 1 0 2

^top



Performance of RDfolder - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RDfolder

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 181
Total TN 49601
Total FP 150
Total FP CONTRA 29
Total FP INCONS 98
Total FP COMP 23
Total FN 219
Total Scores
MCC 0.512
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.515 ± 0.129
Sensitivity 0.453
Positive Predictive Value 0.588
Nr of predictions 24

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
PDB_00012 1.00 1.00 1.00 7 399 3 0 0 3 0
RFA_00390 0.33 0.33 0.33 5 1416 10 1 9 0 10
RFA_00416 0.77 0.60 1.00 9 1476 1 0 0 1 6
RFA_00433 1.00 1.00 1.00 15 1416 2 0 0 2 0
RFA_00587 1.00 1.00 1.00 15 4836 11 0 0 11 0
RFA_00636 0.65 0.64 0.67 18 3978 9 3 6 0 10
RFA_00654 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 2404 11 2 9 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 10 0 10 0 14
RFA_00703 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 4269 9 4 5 0 14
RFA_00708 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1028 7 0 7 0 14
RFA_00749 0.43 0.42 0.45 5 892 7 1 5 1 7
RFA_00764 0.51 0.42 0.63 5 895 4 1 2 1 7
RFA_00765 0.43 0.42 0.45 5 892 7 2 4 1 7
RFA_00767 0.71 0.50 1.00 9 1882 0 0 0 0 9
RFA_00768 0.74 0.56 1.00 10 1881 0 0 0 0 8
RFA_00769 0.50 0.50 0.50 9 1935 9 4 5 0 9
RFA_00770 0.47 0.39 0.58 7 2004 5 1 4 0 11
RFA_00773 0.67 0.50 0.90 9 1943 1 1 0 0 9
RFA_00779 0.71 0.50 1.00 9 1944 0 0 0 0 9
RFA_00808 0.68 0.56 0.82 9 2005 3 0 2 1 7
RFA_00809 0.40 0.38 0.43 6 2131 8 1 7 0 10
SRP_00137 0.38 0.40 0.37 10 4159 17 8 9 0 15
SRP_00285 0.45 0.40 0.52 12 3718 11 0 11 0 18

^top


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