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 Cylofold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

  5. Compile and download dataset for Cylofold & Contrafold [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric Cylofold Contrafold
MCC 0.701 > 0.528
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.777 ± 0.078 > 0.557 ± 0.085
Sensitivity 0.673 > 0.491
Positive Predictive Value 0.734 > 0.575
Total TP 669 > 488
Total TN 135259 < 135321
Total FP 262 < 384
Total FP CONTRA 34 > 33
Total FP INCONS 208 < 328
Total FP COMP 20 < 23
Total FN 325 < 506
P-value 3.56938820447e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of Cylofold 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 Cylofold 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 Cylofold and Contrafold).

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

^top





Performance of Cylofold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Cylofold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 669
Total TN 135259
Total FP 262
Total FP CONTRA 34
Total FP INCONS 208
Total FP COMP 20
Total FN 325
Total Scores
MCC 0.701
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.777 ± 0.078
Sensitivity 0.673
Positive Predictive Value 0.734
Nr of predictions 47

^top



2. Individual counts for Cylofold [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
ASE_00408 - 0.17 0.15 0.20 11 32329 45 3 42 0 60
ASE_00429 - 0.38 0.33 0.43 22 28152 33 0 29 4 44
PDB_00005 0.78 0.79 0.79 11 932 3 0 3 0 3
PDB_00018 - 0.90 0.90 0.90 18 1015 2 2 0 0 2
PDB_00020 - 0.79 0.75 0.83 15 762 3 0 3 0 5
PDB_00041 - 1.00 1.00 1.00 12 618 0 0 0 0 0
PDB_00053 - 1.00 1.00 1.00 11 424 0 0 0 0 0
PDB_00056 - 0.93 0.88 1.00 14 616 0 0 0 0 2
PDB_00123 - 0.94 0.94 0.94 34 4150 2 2 0 0 2
PDB_00124 - 0.86 0.90 0.82 9 485 2 2 0 0 1
PDB_00128 - 0.78 0.79 0.79 11 482 3 0 3 0 3
PDB_00134 - 0.94 1.00 0.89 8 369 1 1 0 0 0
PDB_00138 - 0.94 1.00 0.89 8 369 1 1 0 0 0
PDB_00209 - 0.96 1.00 0.92 11 549 1 1 0 0 0
PDB_00243 - 1.00 1.00 1.00 12 618 0 0 0 0 0
PDB_00352 - 0.90 0.95 0.86 18 1204 3 2 1 0 1
PDB_00571 0.87 0.80 0.95 20 3300 1 1 0 0 5
PDB_00713 - 0.24 0.24 0.26 5 1997 14 0 14 0 16
PDB_00716 0.68 0.70 0.67 16 2677 9 0 8 1 7
PDB_00828 0.88 0.78 1.00 21 2464 0 0 0 0 6
PDB_00829 0.43 0.42 0.45 10 2256 12 0 12 0 14
PDB_00842 - 1.00 1.00 1.00 8 370 0 0 0 0 0
PDB_00851 - 0.45 0.39 0.53 16 4723 14 0 14 0 25
PDB_00857 - 1.00 1.00 1.00 15 1066 0 0 0 0 0
PDB_00874 - 0.21 0.20 0.25 4 930 12 0 12 0 16
PDB_00886 - 0.34 0.35 0.35 14 4146 26 0 26 0 26
PDB_00918 - 0.93 1.00 0.88 7 317 1 1 0 0 0
PDB_01009 0.90 0.90 0.90 19 2464 5 0 2 3 2
PDB_01020 0.86 0.74 1.00 17 2261 1 0 0 1 6
PDB_01040 - 1.00 1.00 1.00 20 1108 0 0 0 0 0
PDB_01059 - 0.88 1.00 0.78 7 222 2 2 0 0 0
PDB_01073 0.75 0.65 0.88 22 4346 4 2 1 1 12
PDB_01194 - 0.97 0.93 1.00 14 482 0 0 0 0 1
PDB_01201 - 0.95 0.91 1.00 20 1108 0 0 0 0 2
PDB_01203 - 0.74 0.68 0.81 13 1160 3 2 1 0 6
PDB_01260 - 0.41 0.36 0.47 9 1811 10 0 10 0 16
PDB_01281 - -0.03 0.00 0.00 0 366 12 0 12 0 14
PDB_01299 - 0.90 0.87 0.93 13 889 1 1 0 0 2
RFA_00632 0.54 0.54 0.56 15 4068 12 2 10 0 13
RFA_00636 0.78 0.82 0.74 23 3974 8 7 1 0 5
RFA_00767 1.00 1.00 1.00 18 1873 4 0 0 4 0
RFA_00768 1.00 1.00 1.00 18 1873 0 0 0 0 0
RFA_00769 0.97 1.00 0.95 18 1934 1 1 0 0 0
RFA_00770 0.88 0.78 1.00 14 2002 3 0 0 3 4
RFA_00773 0.97 1.00 0.95 18 1934 4 1 0 3 0
RFA_00779 0.97 0.94 1.00 17 1936 0 0 0 0 1
RFA_00809 0.79 0.81 0.76 13 2128 4 0 4 0 3

^top



Performance of Contrafold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Contrafold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 488
Total TN 135321
Total FP 384
Total FP CONTRA 33
Total FP INCONS 328
Total FP COMP 23
Total FN 506
Total Scores
MCC 0.528
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.557 ± 0.085
Sensitivity 0.491
Positive Predictive Value 0.575
Nr of predictions 47

^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
ASE_00408 - 0.77 0.76 0.77 54 32315 19 2 14 3 17
ASE_00429 - 0.44 0.41 0.48 27 28147 36 4 25 7 39
PDB_00005 0.88 0.79 1.00 11 935 0 0 0 0 3
PDB_00018 - 0.18 0.20 0.20 4 1015 16 2 14 0 16
PDB_00020 - 0.38 0.35 0.44 7 764 9 0 9 0 13
PDB_00041 - 0.70 0.50 1.00 6 624 0 0 0 0 6
PDB_00053 - 0.73 0.55 1.00 6 429 0 0 0 0 5
PDB_00056 - 0.25 0.25 0.29 4 616 10 0 10 0 12
PDB_00123 - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 4151 35 0 35 0 36
PDB_00124 - -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 486 10 2 8 0 10
PDB_00128 - 0.80 0.71 0.91 10 485 1 0 1 0 4
PDB_00134 - 0.79 0.63 1.00 5 373 0 0 0 0 3
PDB_00138 - 0.79 0.63 1.00 5 373 0 0 0 0 3
PDB_00209 - 0.56 0.45 0.71 5 554 2 0 2 0 6
PDB_00243 - 0.63 0.58 0.70 7 620 3 0 3 0 5
PDB_00352 - 0.92 0.84 1.00 16 1209 0 0 0 0 3
PDB_00571 0.87 0.80 0.95 20 3300 1 1 0 0 5
PDB_00713 - 0.58 0.57 0.60 12 1996 8 1 7 0 9
PDB_00716 0.33 0.30 0.37 7 2682 13 0 12 1 16
PDB_00828 0.88 0.78 1.00 21 2464 1 0 0 1 6
PDB_00829 0.84 0.75 0.95 18 2259 1 0 1 0 6
PDB_00842 - 0.79 0.63 1.00 5 373 0 0 0 0 3
PDB_00851 - 0.44 0.39 0.50 16 4721 16 0 16 0 25
PDB_00857 - 0.73 0.60 0.90 9 1071 1 0 1 0 6
PDB_00874 - -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 928 19 0 18 1 20
PDB_00886 - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 4146 40 0 40 0 40
PDB_00918 - 0.75 0.57 1.00 4 321 0 0 0 0 3
PDB_01009 0.46 0.52 0.41 11 2458 16 5 11 0 10
PDB_01020 0.81 0.74 0.89 17 2259 3 1 1 1 6
PDB_01040 - 0.29 0.30 0.30 6 1108 14 0 14 0 14
PDB_01059 - 0.75 0.57 1.00 4 227 0 0 0 0 3
PDB_01073 0.86 0.74 1.00 25 4346 1 0 0 1 9
PDB_01194 - -0.03 0.00 0.00 0 485 11 0 11 0 15
PDB_01201 - 0.85 0.73 1.00 16 1112 0 0 0 0 6
PDB_01203 - 0.70 0.68 0.72 13 1158 5 3 2 0 6
PDB_01260 - 0.64 0.56 0.74 14 1811 5 1 4 0 11
PDB_01281 - -0.04 0.00 0.00 0 364 14 0 14 0 14
PDB_01299 - 0.74 0.67 0.83 10 891 2 1 1 0 5
RFA_00632 0.38 0.39 0.37 11 4065 19 0 19 0 17
RFA_00636 0.60 0.64 0.56 18 3973 14 4 10 0 10
RFA_00767 0.74 0.56 1.00 10 1881 2 0 0 2 8
RFA_00768 0.45 0.44 0.47 8 1874 9 1 8 0 10
RFA_00769 0.54 0.56 0.53 10 1934 9 4 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 4 1 0 3 8
RFA_00779 0.68 0.56 0.83 10 1941 2 0 2 0 8
RFA_00809 0.40 0.38 0.43 6 2131 8 0 8 0 10

^top


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