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 Fold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

  4. Performance of CMfinder(20) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric Fold CMfinder(20)
MCC 0.653 > 0.652
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.614 ± 0.478 < 0.662 ± 0.224
Sensitivity 0.667 > 0.518
Positive Predictive Value 0.650 < 0.831
Total TP 76 > 59
Total TN 8120 < 8166
Total FP 52 > 16
Total FP CONTRA 11 > 3
Total FP INCONS 30 > 9
Total FP COMP 11 > 4
Total FN 38 < 55
P-value 0.0

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of Fold and CMfinder(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 Fold and CMfinder(20)).

  2. Comparison of performance of Fold and CMfinder(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 Fold and CMfinder(20)).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for Fold and CMfinder(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 Fold and CMfinder(20)).

  4. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for Fold and CMfinder(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 Fold and CMfinder(20)).

^top





Performance of Fold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Fold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 76
Total TN 8120
Total FP 52
Total FP CONTRA 11
Total FP INCONS 30
Total FP COMP 11
Total FN 38
Total Scores
MCC 0.653
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.614 ± 0.478
Sensitivity 0.667
Positive Predictive Value 0.650
Nr of predictions 4

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
3J20_0 0.54 0.57 0.52 12 1196 12 3 8 1 9
3J2L_3 0.80 0.82 0.78 28 2984 12 1 7 4 6
3ZEX_D 0.90 0.86 0.94 30 2764 8 0 2 6 5
4FRG_B 0.22 0.25 0.23 6 1176 20 7 13 0 18

^top



Performance of CMfinder(20) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 59
Total TN 8166
Total FP 16
Total FP CONTRA 3
Total FP INCONS 9
Total FP COMP 4
Total FN 55
Total Scores
MCC 0.652
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.662 ± 0.224
Sensitivity 0.518
Positive Predictive Value 0.831
Nr of predictions 4

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
3J20_0 0.84 0.76 0.94 16 1202 2 1 0 1 5
3J2L_3 0.57 0.50 0.65 17 2994 11 2 7 2 17
3ZEX_D 0.70 0.54 0.90 19 2775 3 0 2 1 16
4FRG_B 0.54 0.29 1.00 7 1195 0 0 0 0 17

^top


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