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 CentroidFold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric CentroidFold TurboFold(seed)
MCC 0.621 > 0.600
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.630 ± 0.089 < 0.632 ± 0.110
Sensitivity 0.536 > 0.518
Positive Predictive Value 0.726 > 0.702
Total TP 90 > 87
Total TN 19699 = 19699
Total FP 38 < 41
Total FP CONTRA 9 > 7
Total FP INCONS 25 < 30
Total FP COMP 4 = 4
Total FN 78 < 81
P-value 0.0

^top




Performance plots


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

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

^top





Performance of CentroidFold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for CentroidFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 90
Total TN 19699
Total FP 38
Total FP CONTRA 9
Total FP INCONS 25
Total FP COMP 4
Total FN 78
Total Scores
MCC 0.621
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.630 ± 0.089
Sensitivity 0.536
Positive Predictive Value 0.726
Nr of predictions 9

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
RFA_00636 0.64 0.64 0.64 18 3977 10 4 6 0 10
RFA_00767 0.74 0.56 1.00 10 1881 0 0 0 0 8
RFA_00768 0.45 0.44 0.47 8 1874 9 1 8 0 10
RFA_00769 0.63 0.56 0.71 10 1939 4 3 1 0 8
RFA_00770 0.64 0.50 0.82 9 2005 4 0 2 2 9
RFA_00773 0.71 0.56 0.91 10 1942 3 1 0 2 8
RFA_00779 0.68 0.56 0.83 10 1941 2 0 2 0 8
RFA_00808 0.75 0.56 1.00 9 2007 0 0 0 0 7
RFA_00809 0.43 0.38 0.50 6 2133 6 0 6 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 87
Total TN 19699
Total FP 41
Total FP CONTRA 7
Total FP INCONS 30
Total FP COMP 4
Total FN 81
Total Scores
MCC 0.600
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.632 ± 0.110
Sensitivity 0.518
Positive Predictive Value 0.702
Nr of predictions 9

^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_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.