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 Sfold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric TurboFold(seed) Sfold
MCC 0.633 > 0.512
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.640 ± 0.098 > 0.503 ± 0.155
Sensitivity 0.562 > 0.489
Positive Predictive Value 0.716 > 0.540
Total TP 131 > 114
Total TN 46901 > 46873
Total FP 57 < 103
Total FP CONTRA 11 < 17
Total FP INCONS 41 < 80
Total FP COMP 5 < 6
Total FN 102 < 119
P-value 1.5677163434e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

  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 Sfold).

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

^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 Sfold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Sfold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 114
Total TN 46873
Total FP 103
Total FP CONTRA 17
Total FP INCONS 80
Total FP COMP 6
Total FN 119
Total Scores
MCC 0.512
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.503 ± 0.155
Sensitivity 0.489
Positive Predictive Value 0.540
Nr of predictions 10

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
ASE_00210 0.59 0.60 0.59 39 27195 27 6 21 0 26
RFA_00636 0.40 0.39 0.41 11 3978 16 2 14 0 17
RFA_00767 0.74 0.56 1.00 10 1881 0 0 0 0 8
RFA_00768 0.48 0.44 0.53 8 1876 7 1 6 0 10
RFA_00769 0.52 0.56 0.50 10 1933 10 4 6 0 8
RFA_00770 0.68 0.56 0.83 10 2004 5 0 2 3 8
RFA_00773 0.57 0.56 0.59 10 1936 7 1 6 0 8
RFA_00779 0.68 0.56 0.83 10 1941 2 0 2 0 8
RFA_00808 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 2000 19 2 14 3 16
RFA_00809 0.37 0.38 0.38 6 2129 10 1 9 0 10

^top


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