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 RNAalifold(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric RNAalifold(seed) Afold
MCC 0.638 > 0.517
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.633 ± 0.055 > 0.507 ± 0.168
Sensitivity 0.503 > 0.480
Positive Predictive Value 0.814 > 0.564
Total TP 153 > 146
Total TN 39394 > 39323
Total FP 36 < 134
Total FP CONTRA 8 < 12
Total FP INCONS 27 < 101
Total FP COMP 1 < 21
Total FN 151 < 158
P-value 2.10198558684e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of RNAalifold(seed) and Afold. 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 RNAalifold(seed) and Afold).

  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 RNAalifold(seed) and Afold).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for RNAalifold(seed) and Afold. 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 RNAalifold(seed) and Afold).

^top





Performance of RNAalifold(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 153
Total TN 39394
Total FP 36
Total FP CONTRA 8
Total FP INCONS 27
Total FP COMP 1
Total FN 151
Total Scores
MCC 0.638
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.633 ± 0.055
Sensitivity 0.503
Positive Predictive Value 0.814
Nr of predictions 13

^top



2. Individual counts for RNAalifold(seed) [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
PDB_00716 0.60 0.43 0.83 10 2689 2 0 2 0 13
PDB_00828 0.70 0.59 0.84 16 2466 3 2 1 0 11
PDB_00829 0.75 0.67 0.84 16 2259 3 2 1 0 8
PDB_01092 0.70 0.54 0.90 28 10122 4 0 3 1 24
RFA_00632 0.49 0.32 0.75 9 4083 3 2 1 0 19
RFA_00636 0.49 0.32 0.75 9 3993 3 2 1 0 19
RFA_00767 0.65 0.56 0.77 10 1878 3 0 3 0 8
RFA_00768 0.65 0.56 0.77 10 1878 3 0 3 0 8
RFA_00769 0.65 0.56 0.77 10 1940 3 0 3 0 8
RFA_00770 0.65 0.56 0.77 10 2003 3 0 3 0 8
RFA_00773 0.65 0.56 0.77 10 1940 3 0 3 0 8
RFA_00808 0.75 0.56 1.00 9 2007 0 0 0 0 7
RFA_00809 0.50 0.38 0.67 6 2136 3 0 3 0 10

^top



Performance of Afold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Afold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 146
Total TN 39323
Total FP 134
Total FP CONTRA 12
Total FP INCONS 101
Total FP COMP 21
Total FN 158
Total Scores
MCC 0.517
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.507 ± 0.168
Sensitivity 0.480
Positive Predictive Value 0.564
Nr of predictions 13

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
PDB_00716 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 2677 25 1 23 1 23
PDB_00828 0.88 0.78 1.00 21 2464 0 0 0 0 6
PDB_00829 0.82 0.71 0.94 17 2260 1 0 1 0 7
PDB_01092 0.69 0.60 0.79 31 10114 11 1 7 3 21
RFA_00632 0.40 0.39 0.41 11 4068 18 0 16 2 17
RFA_00636 0.42 0.43 0.43 12 3977 17 2 14 1 16
RFA_00767 0.63 0.56 0.71 10 1877 5 0 4 1 8
RFA_00768 0.48 0.44 0.53 8 1876 8 1 6 1 10
RFA_00769 0.55 0.56 0.56 10 1935 10 3 5 2 8
RFA_00770 0.68 0.56 0.83 10 2004 6 0 2 4 8
RFA_00773 0.71 0.56 0.91 10 1942 5 1 0 4 8
RFA_00808 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 2001 16 2 13 1 16
RFA_00809 0.36 0.38 0.35 6 2128 12 1 10 1 10

^top


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