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 PPfold(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric PPfold(seed) Contrafold
MCC 0.716 > 0.654
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.749 ± 0.077 > 0.638 ± 0.080
Sensitivity 0.652 < 0.661
Positive Predictive Value 0.787 > 0.648
Total TP 1226 < 1242
Total TN 1050327 > 1049966
Total FP 467 < 876
Total FP CONTRA 48 < 139
Total FP INCONS 283 < 537
Total FP COMP 136 < 200
Total FN 653 > 637
P-value 4.98172311752e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

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

^top





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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 1226
Total TN 1050327
Total FP 467
Total FP CONTRA 48
Total FP INCONS 283
Total FP COMP 136
Total FN 653
Total Scores
MCC 0.716
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.749 ± 0.077
Sensitivity 0.652
Positive Predictive Value 0.787
Nr of predictions 23

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
RFA_00626 0.94 0.89 1.00 77 56539 1 0 0 1 10
RFA_00627 0.95 0.91 1.00 79 56874 4 0 0 4 8
RFA_00628 0.95 0.91 1.00 78 57213 2 0 0 2 8
RFA_00630 0.91 0.85 0.97 74 56877 5 0 2 3 13
RFA_00805 0.46 0.21 1.00 32 133354 0 0 0 0 118
RFA_00814 0.94 0.88 1.00 36 25164 2 0 0 2 5
RFA_00816 0.95 0.90 1.00 37 23183 2 0 0 2 4
RFA_00817 0.95 0.90 1.00 37 21908 1 0 0 1 4
RFA_00818 0.94 0.88 1.00 36 20265 2 0 0 2 5
RFA_00819 0.95 0.90 1.00 37 27929 2 0 0 2 4
SRP_00079 0.74 0.69 0.79 61 41828 28 0 16 12 27
SRP_00099 0.60 0.59 0.62 56 44760 40 2 32 6 39
SRP_00124 0.71 0.66 0.76 56 37054 27 3 15 9 29
SRP_00182 0.85 0.78 0.92 79 45970 17 0 7 10 22
SRP_00241 0.53 0.52 0.54 43 45977 49 9 27 13 39
SRP_00252 0.64 0.63 0.64 56 49054 42 5 26 11 33
SRP_00253 0.64 0.62 0.66 56 49370 40 5 24 11 34
SRP_00257 0.51 0.44 0.59 48 50959 36 5 28 3 60
SRP_00260 0.56 0.51 0.61 51 47811 39 5 28 6 49
SRP_00328 0.61 0.56 0.67 48 39549 29 5 19 5 37
SRP_00329 0.72 0.67 0.78 57 39830 26 2 14 10 28
SRP_00331 0.63 0.59 0.69 51 37601 31 2 21 8 36
SRP_00340 0.54 0.50 0.59 41 41258 42 5 24 13 41

^top



Performance of Contrafold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Contrafold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 1242
Total TN 1049966
Total FP 876
Total FP CONTRA 139
Total FP INCONS 537
Total FP COMP 200
Total FN 637
Total Scores
MCC 0.654
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.638 ± 0.080
Sensitivity 0.661
Positive Predictive Value 0.648
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_00626 0.91 0.87 0.94 76 56535 26 1 4 21 11
RFA_00627 0.86 0.83 0.89 72 56872 28 0 9 19 15
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_00805 0.83 0.74 0.93 111 133266 19 1 8 10 39
RFA_00814 0.79 0.78 0.80 32 25160 19 1 7 11 9
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
RFA_00819 0.46 0.46 0.45 19 27924 47 3 20 24 22
SRP_00079 0.62 0.63 0.63 55 41817 43 3 30 10 33
SRP_00099 0.62 0.62 0.62 59 44755 37 7 29 1 36
SRP_00124 0.63 0.62 0.63 53 37044 38 3 28 7 32
SRP_00182 0.58 0.58 0.58 59 45955 45 10 32 3 42
SRP_00241 0.51 0.55 0.47 45 45961 53 14 36 3 37
SRP_00252 0.54 0.56 0.52 50 49044 53 7 40 6 39
SRP_00253 0.47 0.49 0.44 44 49356 61 9 46 6 46
SRP_00257 0.86 0.85 0.88 92 50935 22 0 13 9 16
SRP_00260 0.71 0.74 0.69 74 47787 37 6 28 3 26
SRP_00328 0.60 0.62 0.58 53 39530 41 10 28 3 32
SRP_00329 0.59 0.61 0.58 52 39813 43 6 32 5 33
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.