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 PPfold(seed) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric CentroidFold PPfold(seed)
MCC 0.703 > 0.157
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.688 ± 0.097 > 0.062 ± 0.069
Sensitivity 0.692 > 0.040
Positive Predictive Value 0.722 > 0.634
Total TP 452 > 26
Total TN 52251 < 52836
Total FP 247 > 80
Total FP CONTRA 58 > 1
Total FP INCONS 116 > 14
Total FP COMP 73 > 65
Total FN 201 < 627
P-value 5.23657817852e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

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

^top





Performance of CentroidFold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for CentroidFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 452
Total TN 52251
Total FP 247
Total FP CONTRA 58
Total FP INCONS 116
Total FP COMP 73
Total FN 201
Total Scores
MCC 0.703
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.688 ± 0.097
Sensitivity 0.692
Positive Predictive Value 0.722
Nr of predictions 27

^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
2LC8_A 0.51 0.39 0.70 7 518 3 1 2 0 11
3AMU_B 0.81 0.79 0.83 15 1139 6 0 3 3 4
3J16_L 0.59 0.57 0.63 12 1140 7 0 7 0 9
3J20_1 1.00 1.00 1.00 20 1092 2 0 0 2 0
3J20_0 0.54 0.57 0.52 12 1196 12 3 8 1 9
3J2L_3 0.74 0.76 0.72 26 2984 15 1 9 5 8
3J3D_C 0.73 0.79 0.68 15 946 7 3 4 0 4
3J3E_8 0.12 0.13 0.13 2 2726 22 4 10 8 13
3J3E_7 0.61 0.59 0.65 20 2710 13 2 9 2 14
3J3F_7 0.84 0.86 0.82 31 2896 9 1 6 2 5
3J3F_8 0.36 0.47 0.28 9 4729 37 12 11 14 10
3RKF_A 0.91 0.83 1.00 20 846 0 0 0 0 4
3SD1_A 0.70 0.69 0.71 20 1505 8 4 4 0 9
3UZL_B 0.93 0.88 1.00 14 1279 7 0 0 7 2
3W1K_J 0.97 0.97 0.97 30 1647 1 1 0 0 1
3W3S_B 0.95 0.91 1.00 30 1959 1 0 0 1 3
3ZEX_C 0.48 0.34 0.67 10 5359 6 1 4 1 19
3ZEX_D 0.88 0.86 0.91 30 2763 8 0 3 5 5
3ZND_W 0.24 0.38 0.16 3 1172 25 9 7 9 5
4A1C_3 0.80 0.78 0.83 29 2728 8 0 6 2 8
4A1C_2 0.22 0.25 0.19 5 4490 29 9 12 8 15
4AOB_A 0.50 0.48 0.54 14 1411 13 3 9 1 15
4ENB_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 461 1 0 0 1 4
4ENC_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 485 1 0 0 1 4
4FRG_B 0.75 0.71 0.81 17 1181 4 3 1 0 7
4FRN_A 0.80 0.71 0.91 20 1826 2 1 1 0 8
4JF2_A 0.89 0.79 1.00 19 1063 0 0 0 0 5

^top



Performance of PPfold(seed) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 26
Total TN 52836
Total FP 80
Total FP CONTRA 1
Total FP INCONS 14
Total FP COMP 65
Total FN 627
Total Scores
MCC 0.157
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.062 ± 0.069
Sensitivity 0.040
Positive Predictive Value 0.634
Nr of predictions 27

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.49 0.33 0.75 6 520 2 0 2 0 12
3AMU_B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1157 0 0 0 0 19
3J16_L 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1159 0 0 0 0 21
3J20_1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1112 0 0 0 0 20
3J20_0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1219 0 0 0 0 21
3J2L_3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 3020 0 0 0 0 34
3J3D_C 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 968 0 0 0 0 19
3J3E_8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2742 6 0 0 6 15
3J3E_7 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2741 0 0 0 0 34
3J3F_7 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2934 0 0 0 0 36
3J3F_8 0.19 0.11 0.33 2 4755 24 0 4 20 17
3RKF_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 866 0 0 0 0 24
3SD1_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1533 0 0 0 0 29
3UZL_B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1293 0 0 0 0 16
3W1K_J 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1678 0 0 0 0 31
3W3S_B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1989 0 0 0 0 33
3ZEX_C 0.15 0.07 0.33 2 5368 24 0 4 20 27
3ZEX_D 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2796 0 0 0 0 35
3ZND_W 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1191 0 0 0 0 8
4A1C_3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2763 0 0 0 0 37
4A1C_2 0.10 0.05 0.20 1 4511 23 0 4 19 19
4AOB_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1437 0 0 0 0 29
4ENB_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 472 0 0 0 0 15
4ENC_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 496 0 0 0 0 15
4FRG_B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1202 0 0 0 0 24
4FRN_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1848 0 0 0 0 28
4JF2_A 0.76 0.63 0.94 15 1066 1 1 0 0 9

^top


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