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 TurboFold(20) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric CentroidAlifold(20) TurboFold(20)
MCC 0.802 > 0.758
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.748 ± 0.117 > 0.744 ± 0.102
Sensitivity 0.734 < 0.748
Positive Predictive Value 0.880 > 0.773
Total TP 367 < 374
Total TN 43240 > 43173
Total FP 91 < 185
Total FP CONTRA 14 < 36
Total FP INCONS 36 < 74
Total FP COMP 41 < 75
Total FN 133 > 126
P-value 5.06544643719e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of CentroidAlifold(20) and TurboFold(20). 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 TurboFold(20)).

  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 TurboFold(20)).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for CentroidAlifold(20) and TurboFold(20). 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 TurboFold(20)).

^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 367
Total TN 43240
Total FP 91
Total FP CONTRA 14
Total FP INCONS 36
Total FP COMP 41
Total FN 133
Total Scores
MCC 0.802
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.748 ± 0.117
Sensitivity 0.734
Positive Predictive Value 0.880
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_8 0.44 0.37 0.54 7 4748 8 3 3 2 12
3J3F_7 0.94 0.94 0.94 34 2898 4 1 1 2 2
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_C 0.44 0.31 0.64 9 5360 7 1 4 2 20
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 TurboFold(20) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 374
Total TN 43173
Total FP 185
Total FP CONTRA 36
Total FP INCONS 74
Total FP COMP 75
Total FN 126
Total Scores
MCC 0.758
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.744 ± 0.102
Sensitivity 0.748
Positive Predictive Value 0.773
Nr of predictions 21

^top



2. Individual counts for TurboFold(20) [ 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 0.81 0.79 0.83 15 1139 6 0 3 3 4
3J20_1 1.00 1.00 1.00 20 1092 1 0 0 1 0
3J20_0 0.74 0.76 0.73 16 1197 7 1 5 1 5
3J2L_3 0.92 0.91 0.94 31 2987 5 1 1 3 3
3J3D_C 0.90 0.95 0.86 18 947 3 3 0 0 1
3J3E_7 0.88 0.85 0.91 29 2709 8 0 3 5 5
3J3E_8 0.27 0.33 0.23 5 2720 28 6 11 11 10
3J3F_8 0.42 0.53 0.34 10 4732 37 9 10 18 9
3J3F_7 0.94 0.94 0.94 34 2898 4 1 1 2 2
3RKF_A 0.91 0.83 1.00 20 846 0 0 0 0 4
3SD1_A 0.71 0.69 0.74 20 1506 7 2 5 0 9
3ZEX_C 0.49 0.45 0.54 13 5350 15 2 9 4 16
3ZEX_D 0.86 0.80 0.93 28 2766 6 0 2 4 7
3ZND_W 0.64 0.75 0.55 6 1180 15 2 3 10 2
4A1C_3 0.86 0.84 0.89 31 2728 6 0 4 2 6
4A1C_2 0.22 0.25 0.21 5 4492 28 6 13 9 15
4AOB_A 0.67 0.59 0.77 17 1415 6 2 3 1 12
4ENB_A 0.77 0.60 1.00 9 463 0 0 0 0 6
4ENC_A 0.73 0.60 0.90 9 486 1 1 0 0 6
4FRG_B 0.93 0.88 1.00 21 1181 0 0 0 0 3

^top


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