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 CentroidAlifold(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

  4. Performance of CentroidHomfold‑LAST - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

  5. Compile and download dataset for CentroidAlifold(20) & CentroidHomfold‑LAST [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric CentroidAlifold(20) CentroidHomfold‑LAST
MCC 0.822 > 0.725
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.768 ± 0.114 > 0.716 ± 0.116
Sensitivity 0.763 > 0.723
Positive Predictive Value 0.890 > 0.733
Total TP 380 > 360
Total TN 40512 > 40448
Total FP 91 < 204
Total FP CONTRA 13 < 42
Total FP INCONS 34 < 89
Total FP COMP 44 < 73
Total FN 118 < 138
P-value 5.19332990918e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of CentroidAlifold(20) and CentroidHomfold-LAST. 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 CentroidAlifold(20) and CentroidHomfold‑LAST).

  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 CentroidAlifold(20) and CentroidHomfold‑LAST).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for CentroidAlifold(20) and CentroidHomfold-LAST. 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 CentroidAlifold(20) and CentroidHomfold‑LAST).

^top





Performance of CentroidAlifold(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for CentroidAlifold(20)

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 380
Total TN 40512
Total FP 91
Total FP CONTRA 13
Total FP INCONS 34
Total FP COMP 44
Total FN 118
Total Scores
MCC 0.822
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.768 ± 0.114
Sensitivity 0.763
Positive Predictive Value 0.890
Nr of predictions 21

^top



2. Individual counts for CentroidAlifold(20) [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2L94_A 0.59 0.56 0.67 10 342 6 0 5 1 8
3AMU_B 1.00 1.00 1.00 19 1138 2 0 0 2 0
3J20_1 1.00 1.00 1.00 20 1092 1 0 0 1 0
3J20_0 0.95 0.95 0.95 20 1198 2 1 0 1 1
3J2L_3 0.94 0.88 1.00 30 2990 3 0 0 3 4
3J3D_C 0.90 0.95 0.86 18 947 3 3 0 0 1
3J3E_7 0.80 0.82 0.78 28 2705 12 1 7 4 6
3J3E_8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2738 4 1 3 0 15
3J3F_7 0.94 0.94 0.94 34 2898 4 1 1 2 2
3J3F_8 0.44 0.37 0.54 7 4748 8 3 3 2 12
3J3V_B 0.86 0.81 0.92 22 2632 7 0 2 5 5
3RKF_A 0.86 0.75 1.00 18 848 0 0 0 0 6
3SD1_A 0.85 0.76 0.96 22 1510 1 0 1 0 7
3ZEX_D 0.91 0.89 0.94 31 2763 6 0 2 4 4
3ZND_W 0.67 0.75 0.60 6 1181 16 0 4 12 2
4A1C_3 0.93 0.92 0.94 34 2727 4 0 2 2 3
4A1C_2 0.33 0.25 0.45 5 4505 8 3 3 2 15
4AOB_A 0.89 0.79 1.00 23 1414 2 0 0 2 6
4ENB_A 0.77 0.60 1.00 9 463 0 0 0 0 6
4ENC_A 0.68 0.47 1.00 7 489 0 0 0 0 8
4FRG_B 0.81 0.71 0.94 17 1184 2 0 1 1 7

^top



Performance of CentroidHomfold‑LAST - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for CentroidHomfold‑LAST

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 360
Total TN 40448
Total FP 204
Total FP CONTRA 42
Total FP INCONS 89
Total FP COMP 73
Total FN 138
Total Scores
MCC 0.725
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.716 ± 0.116
Sensitivity 0.723
Positive Predictive Value 0.733
Nr of predictions 21

^top



2. Individual counts for CentroidHomfold‑LAST [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2L94_A 0.94 0.94 0.94 17 339 2 0 1 1 1
3AMU_B 0.95 0.95 0.95 18 1138 4 0 1 3 1
3J20_1 1.00 1.00 1.00 20 1092 1 0 0 1 0
3J20_0 0.41 0.52 0.34 11 1187 22 7 14 1 10
3J2L_3 0.94 0.94 0.94 32 2986 8 0 2 6 2
3J3D_C 0.73 0.79 0.68 15 946 7 3 4 0 4
3J3E_7 0.85 0.85 0.85 29 2707 9 0 5 4 5
3J3E_8 0.07 0.07 0.09 1 2731 16 4 6 6 14
3J3F_7 0.79 0.81 0.78 29 2897 10 1 7 2 7
3J3F_8 0.36 0.47 0.27 9 4728 36 11 13 12 10
3J3V_B 0.72 0.67 0.78 18 2633 11 1 4 6 9
3RKF_A 0.86 0.75 1.00 18 848 0 0 0 0 6
3SD1_A 0.77 0.66 0.90 19 1512 2 1 1 0 10
3ZEX_D 0.86 0.83 0.91 29 2764 8 0 3 5 6
3ZND_W 0.75 0.75 0.75 6 1183 13 0 2 11 2
4A1C_3 0.80 0.78 0.83 29 2728 7 0 6 1 8
4A1C_2 0.24 0.25 0.24 5 4495 29 8 8 13 15
4AOB_A 0.85 0.72 1.00 21 1416 1 0 0 1 8
4ENB_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 461 0 0 0 0 4
4ENC_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 485 0 0 0 0 4
4FRG_B 0.43 0.50 0.40 12 1172 18 6 12 0 12

^top


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