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 RNASampler(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric RNASampler(seed) Contrafold
MCC 0.779 > 0.706
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.774 ± 0.092 > 0.659 ± 0.145
Sensitivity 0.659 < 0.703
Positive Predictive Value 0.921 > 0.709
Total TP 442 < 472
Total TN 413762 > 413576
Total FP 105 < 367
Total FP CONTRA 9 < 54
Total FP INCONS 29 < 140
Total FP COMP 67 < 173
Total FN 229 > 199
P-value 1.4651262096e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

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

^top





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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 442
Total TN 413762
Total FP 105
Total FP CONTRA 9
Total FP INCONS 29
Total FP COMP 67
Total FN 229
Total Scores
MCC 0.779
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.774 ± 0.092
Sensitivity 0.659
Positive Predictive Value 0.921
Nr of predictions 12

^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
RFA_00606 0.44 0.36 0.54 14 21295 18 7 5 6 25
RFA_00620 0.52 0.44 0.63 17 21918 15 2 8 5 22
RFA_00626 0.80 0.64 1.00 56 56560 5 0 0 5 31
RFA_00627 0.77 0.63 0.93 55 56894 8 0 4 4 32
RFA_00628 0.78 0.64 0.95 55 57233 12 0 3 9 31
RFA_00630 0.77 0.66 0.90 57 56890 15 0 6 9 30
RFA_00814 0.87 0.78 0.97 32 25167 6 0 1 5 9
RFA_00815 0.88 0.78 1.00 32 24499 8 0 0 8 9
RFA_00816 0.86 0.76 0.97 31 23188 6 0 1 5 10
RFA_00817 0.86 0.76 0.97 31 21913 1 0 1 0 10
RFA_00818 0.86 0.73 1.00 30 20271 6 0 0 6 11
RFA_00819 0.88 0.78 1.00 32 27934 5 0 0 5 9

^top



Performance of Contrafold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Contrafold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 472
Total TN 413576
Total FP 367
Total FP CONTRA 54
Total FP INCONS 140
Total FP COMP 173
Total FN 199
Total Scores
MCC 0.706
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.659 ± 0.145
Sensitivity 0.703
Positive Predictive Value 0.709
Nr of predictions 12

^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_00606 0.53 0.51 0.54 20 21284 25 10 7 8 19
RFA_00620 0.71 0.64 0.78 25 21913 29 0 7 22 14
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_00814 0.79 0.78 0.80 32 25160 19 1 7 11 9
RFA_00815 0.59 0.61 0.57 25 24487 35 2 17 16 16
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

^top


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