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 CentroidHomfold‑LAST - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric TurboFold(seed) CentroidHomfold‑LAST
MCC 0.776 > 0.747
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.801 ± 0.070 > 0.751 ± 0.069
Sensitivity 0.753 > 0.652
Positive Predictive Value 0.802 < 0.858
Total TP 929 > 804
Total TN 664485 < 664707
Total FP 370 > 197
Total FP CONTRA 40 > 28
Total FP INCONS 190 > 105
Total FP COMP 140 > 64
Total FN 305 < 430
P-value 3.39090039918e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of TurboFold(seed) and CentroidHomfold-LAST. 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 CentroidHomfold‑LAST).

  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 CentroidHomfold‑LAST).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for TurboFold(seed) and CentroidHomfold-LAST. 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 CentroidHomfold‑LAST).

^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 929
Total TN 664485
Total FP 370
Total FP CONTRA 40
Total FP INCONS 190
Total FP COMP 140
Total FN 305
Total Scores
MCC 0.776
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.801 ± 0.070
Sensitivity 0.753
Positive Predictive Value 0.802
Nr of predictions 17

^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
ASE_00210 0.71 0.68 0.75 44 27202 16 4 11 1 21
RFA_00626 0.90 0.85 0.95 74 56538 17 0 4 13 13
RFA_00627 0.85 0.82 0.89 71 56873 23 0 9 14 16
RFA_00628 0.92 0.90 0.95 77 57210 17 0 4 13 9
RFA_00630 0.83 0.79 0.87 69 56874 22 0 10 12 18
RFA_00814 0.92 0.85 1.00 35 25165 13 0 0 13 6
RFA_00816 1.00 1.00 1.00 41 23179 14 0 0 14 0
RFA_00817 0.95 0.90 1.00 37 21908 7 0 0 7 4
RFA_00818 0.85 0.80 0.89 33 20264 11 1 3 7 8
RFA_00819 0.98 0.95 1.00 39 27927 27 0 0 27 2
SRP_00241 0.56 0.59 0.54 48 45967 43 12 29 2 34
SRP_00257 0.78 0.72 0.85 78 50948 16 4 10 2 30
SRP_00308 0.76 0.74 0.77 65 36231 20 2 17 1 23
SRP_00328 0.69 0.67 0.70 57 39540 27 5 19 3 28
SRP_00329 0.65 0.64 0.67 54 39822 30 3 24 3 31
SRP_00331 0.67 0.66 0.68 57 37591 29 3 24 2 30
SRP_00340 0.61 0.61 0.61 50 41246 38 6 26 6 32

^top



Performance of CentroidHomfold‑LAST - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for CentroidHomfold‑LAST

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 804
Total TN 664707
Total FP 197
Total FP CONTRA 28
Total FP INCONS 105
Total FP COMP 64
Total FN 430
Total Scores
MCC 0.747
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.751 ± 0.069
Sensitivity 0.652
Positive Predictive Value 0.858
Nr of predictions 17

^top



2. Individual counts for CentroidHomfold‑LAST [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
ASE_00210 0.79 0.69 0.90 45 27211 5 0 5 0 20
RFA_00626 0.85 0.79 0.92 69 56541 13 1 5 7 18
RFA_00627 0.86 0.75 0.98 65 56887 13 0 1 12 22
RFA_00628 0.86 0.78 0.94 67 57220 7 1 3 3 19
RFA_00630 0.87 0.83 0.92 72 56875 10 1 5 4 15
RFA_00814 0.96 0.93 1.00 38 25162 6 0 0 6 3
RFA_00816 0.80 0.63 1.00 26 23194 1 0 0 1 15
RFA_00817 0.68 0.59 0.80 24 21915 9 2 4 3 17
RFA_00818 0.57 0.54 0.61 22 20265 18 8 6 4 19
RFA_00819 0.95 0.93 0.97 38 27927 15 0 1 14 3
SRP_00241 0.65 0.51 0.82 42 46005 10 0 9 1 40
SRP_00257 0.83 0.74 0.93 80 50954 8 3 3 2 28
SRP_00308 0.56 0.34 0.91 30 36282 3 0 3 0 58
SRP_00328 0.67 0.66 0.69 56 39540 29 7 18 4 29
SRP_00329 0.64 0.61 0.68 52 39826 28 4 21 3 33
SRP_00331 0.60 0.53 0.69 46 37608 21 1 20 0 41
SRP_00340 0.61 0.39 0.97 32 41295 1 0 1 0 50

^top


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