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 CentroidHomfold‑LAST - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

  4. Performance of TurboFold(seed) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric CentroidHomfold‑LAST TurboFold(seed)
MCC 0.649 > 0.633
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.623 ± 0.070 < 0.640 ± 0.098
Sensitivity 0.562 = 0.562
Positive Predictive Value 0.753 > 0.716
Total TP 131 = 131
Total TN 46910 > 46901
Total FP 43 < 57
Total FP CONTRA 12 > 11
Total FP INCONS 31 < 41
Total FP COMP 0 < 5
Total FN 102 = 102
P-value 4.45329040827e-07

^top




Performance plots


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

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

^top





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

1. Total counts & total scores for CentroidHomfold‑LAST

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 131
Total TN 46910
Total FP 43
Total FP CONTRA 12
Total FP INCONS 31
Total FP COMP 0
Total FN 102
Total Scores
MCC 0.649
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.623 ± 0.070
Sensitivity 0.562
Positive Predictive Value 0.753
Nr of predictions 10

^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_00636 0.64 0.64 0.64 18 3977 10 3 7 0 10
RFA_00767 0.66 0.44 1.00 8 1883 0 0 0 0 10
RFA_00768 0.66 0.44 1.00 8 1883 0 0 0 0 10
RFA_00769 0.54 0.56 0.53 10 1934 9 4 5 0 8
RFA_00770 0.58 0.39 0.88 7 2008 1 0 1 0 11
RFA_00773 0.55 0.56 0.56 10 1935 8 3 5 0 8
RFA_00779 0.59 0.56 0.63 10 1937 6 2 4 0 8
RFA_00808 0.75 0.56 1.00 9 2007 0 0 0 0 7
RFA_00809 0.47 0.38 0.60 6 2135 4 0 4 0 10

^top



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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 131
Total TN 46901
Total FP 57
Total FP CONTRA 11
Total FP INCONS 41
Total FP COMP 5
Total FN 102
Total Scores
MCC 0.633
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.640 ± 0.098
Sensitivity 0.562
Positive Predictive Value 0.716
Nr of predictions 10

^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_00636 0.42 0.43 0.43 12 3977 16 2 14 0 16
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


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