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 TurboFold(seed) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric Cylofold TurboFold(seed)
MCC 0.911 > 0.587
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.921 ± 0.078 > 0.618 ± 0.122
Sensitivity 0.914 > 0.513
Positive Predictive Value 0.908 > 0.678
Total TP 139 > 78
Total TN 17654 < 17692
Total FP 24 < 41
Total FP CONTRA 9 > 7
Total FP INCONS 5 < 30
Total FP COMP 10 > 4
Total FN 13 < 74
P-value 0.0

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of Cylofold 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 Cylofold 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 Cylofold and TurboFold(seed)).

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

^top





Performance of Cylofold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Cylofold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 139
Total TN 17654
Total FP 24
Total FP CONTRA 9
Total FP INCONS 5
Total FP COMP 10
Total FN 13
Total Scores
MCC 0.911
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.921 ± 0.078
Sensitivity 0.914
Positive Predictive Value 0.908
Nr of predictions 8

^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
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 TurboFold(seed) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 78
Total TN 17692
Total FP 41
Total FP CONTRA 7
Total FP INCONS 30
Total FP COMP 4
Total FN 74
Total Scores
MCC 0.587
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.618 ± 0.122
Sensitivity 0.513
Positive Predictive Value 0.678
Nr of predictions 8

^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
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_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.