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 RNASampler(seed) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric TurboFold(seed) RNASampler(seed)
MCC 0.697 > 0.561
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.717 ± 0.122 > 0.501 ± 0.129
Sensitivity 0.626 > 0.414
Positive Predictive Value 0.780 > 0.765
Total TP 216 > 143
Total TN 41705 < 41795
Total FP 106 > 54
Total FP CONTRA 9 < 20
Total FP INCONS 52 > 24
Total FP COMP 45 > 10
Total FN 129 < 202
P-value 4.94031556815e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

  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 RNASampler(seed)).

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

^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 216
Total TN 41705
Total FP 106
Total FP CONTRA 9
Total FP INCONS 52
Total FP COMP 45
Total FN 129
Total Scores
MCC 0.697
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.717 ± 0.122
Sensitivity 0.626
Positive Predictive Value 0.780
Nr of predictions 22

^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

^top



Performance of RNASampler(seed) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 143
Total TN 41795
Total FP 54
Total FP CONTRA 20
Total FP INCONS 24
Total FP COMP 10
Total FN 202
Total Scores
MCC 0.561
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.501 ± 0.129
Sensitivity 0.414
Positive Predictive Value 0.765
Nr of predictions 22

^top



2. Individual counts for RNASampler(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 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1431 0 0 0 0 15
RFA_00416 0.63 0.40 1.00 6 1479 1 0 0 1 9
RFA_00433 0.63 0.40 1.00 6 1425 1 0 0 1 9
RFA_00587 1.00 1.00 1.00 15 4836 5 0 0 5 0
RFA_00636 0.85 0.75 0.95 21 3983 1 1 0 0 7
RFA_00654 0.39 0.28 0.56 5 2406 4 1 3 0 13
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_00703 0.46 0.21 1.00 3 4275 0 0 0 0 11
RFA_00708 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1035 0 0 0 0 14
RFA_00749 0.50 0.25 1.00 3 900 0 0 0 0 9
RFA_00764 0.50 0.25 1.00 3 900 0 0 0 0 9
RFA_00765 0.50 0.25 1.00 3 900 0 0 0 0 9
RFA_00767 0.65 0.56 0.77 10 1878 3 3 0 0 8
RFA_00768 0.65 0.56 0.77 10 1878 3 3 0 0 8
RFA_00769 0.59 0.56 0.63 10 1937 6 1 5 0 8
RFA_00770 0.52 0.39 0.70 7 2006 3 3 0 0 11
RFA_00773 0.59 0.50 0.69 9 1940 4 4 0 0 9
RFA_00779 0.65 0.56 0.77 10 1940 3 3 0 0 8
RFA_00808 0.58 0.56 0.60 9 2001 6 0 6 0 7
RFA_00809 0.36 0.38 0.35 6 2128 11 1 10 0 10

^top


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