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 Contrafold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric TurboFold(seed) Contrafold
MCC 0.633 > 0.590
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.640 ± 0.098 > 0.605 ± 0.082
Sensitivity 0.562 > 0.558
Positive Predictive Value 0.716 > 0.628
Total TP 131 > 130
Total TN 46901 > 46877
Total FP 57 < 86
Total FP CONTRA 11 < 17
Total FP INCONS 41 < 60
Total FP COMP 5 < 9
Total FN 102 < 103
P-value 9.9460272886e-09

^top




Performance plots


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

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

^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 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



Performance of Contrafold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Contrafold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 130
Total TN 46877
Total FP 86
Total FP CONTRA 17
Total FP INCONS 60
Total FP COMP 9
Total FN 103
Total Scores
MCC 0.590
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.605 ± 0.082
Sensitivity 0.558
Positive Predictive Value 0.628
Nr of predictions 10

^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_00210 0.58 0.60 0.57 39 27192 31 7 23 1 26
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_00808 0.68 0.56 0.82 9 2005 2 0 2 0 7
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.