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 Mastr(20) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric Fold Mastr(20)
MCC 0.694 > 0.573
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.686 ± 0.112 > 0.517 ± 0.157
Sensitivity 0.715 > 0.412
Positive Predictive Value 0.680 < 0.804
Total TP 505 > 291
Total TN 75398 < 75779
Total FP 347 > 108
Total FP CONTRA 65 > 10
Total FP INCONS 173 > 61
Total FP COMP 109 > 37
Total FN 201 < 415
P-value 5.19332990918e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

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

^top





Performance of Fold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Fold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 505
Total TN 75398
Total FP 347
Total FP CONTRA 65
Total FP INCONS 173
Total FP COMP 109
Total FN 201
Total Scores
MCC 0.694
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.686 ± 0.112
Sensitivity 0.715
Positive Predictive Value 0.680
Nr of predictions 24

^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
2L94_A 1.00 1.00 1.00 18 339 1 0 0 1 0
2XKV_B 0.64 0.73 0.57 8 1821 26 0 6 20 3
2XQD_Y 0.98 0.95 1.00 20 1109 1 0 0 1 1
2XXA_G 1.00 1.00 1.00 35 2010 1 0 0 1 0
3AMU_B 0.73 0.79 0.68 15 1135 10 0 7 3 4
3IZ4_A 0.60 0.61 0.59 58 25437 47 16 25 6 37
3IZF_C 0.87 0.89 0.86 31 2604 8 0 5 3 4
3J20_0 0.54 0.57 0.52 12 1196 12 3 8 1 9
3J20_1 1.00 1.00 1.00 20 1092 1 0 0 1 0
3J2L_3 0.80 0.82 0.78 28 2984 12 1 7 4 6
3NPB_A 0.77 0.73 0.82 27 2245 11 0 6 5 10
3O58_3 0.39 0.50 0.31 11 4728 41 9 16 16 11
3O58_2 0.86 0.87 0.84 27 2722 12 0 5 7 4
3PDR_A 0.93 0.92 0.94 46 4791 5 1 2 2 4
3RKF_A 0.91 0.83 1.00 20 846 0 0 0 0 4
3SD1_A 0.68 0.69 0.69 20 1504 9 4 5 0 9
3ZEX_C 0.28 0.34 0.23 10 5330 46 9 25 12 19
3ZEX_D 0.90 0.86 0.94 30 2764 8 0 2 6 5
4A1C_3 0.86 0.84 0.89 31 2728 7 0 4 3 6
4A1C_2 0.19 0.25 0.15 5 4482 43 11 18 14 15
4AOB_A 0.60 0.59 0.63 17 1410 11 4 6 1 12
4ENB_A 0.37 0.33 0.45 5 461 7 0 6 1 10
4ENC_A 0.36 0.33 0.42 5 484 8 0 7 1 10
4FRG_B 0.22 0.25 0.23 6 1176 20 7 13 0 18

^top



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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 291
Total TN 75779
Total FP 108
Total FP CONTRA 10
Total FP INCONS 61
Total FP COMP 37
Total FN 415
Total Scores
MCC 0.573
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.517 ± 0.157
Sensitivity 0.412
Positive Predictive Value 0.804
Nr of predictions 24

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2L94_A 0.88 0.83 0.94 15 341 2 0 1 1 3
2XKV_B 0.60 0.36 1.00 4 1831 3 0 0 3 7
2XQD_Y 0.98 0.95 1.00 20 1109 1 0 0 1 1
2XXA_G 0.44 0.20 1.00 7 2038 0 0 0 0 28
3AMU_B 0.89 0.79 1.00 15 1142 2 0 0 2 4
3IZ4_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 25536 0 0 0 0 95
3IZF_C 0.91 0.91 0.91 32 2605 9 0 3 6 3
3J20_0 0.95 0.95 0.95 20 1198 2 1 0 1 1
3J20_1 0.26 0.25 0.29 5 1095 12 1 11 0 15
3J2L_3 0.42 0.38 0.48 13 2993 16 2 12 2 21
3NPB_A 0.34 0.30 0.41 11 2251 18 1 15 2 26
3O58_3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 4764 0 0 0 0 22
3O58_2 0.93 0.94 0.94 29 2723 12 0 2 10 2
3PDR_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 4840 0 0 0 0 50
3RKF_A 0.84 0.71 1.00 17 849 0 0 0 0 7
3SD1_A 0.73 0.72 0.75 21 1505 7 4 3 0 8
3ZEX_C 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 5374 0 0 0 0 29
3ZEX_D 0.93 0.91 0.94 32 2762 7 0 2 5 3
4A1C_3 0.88 0.86 0.89 32 2727 7 0 4 3 5
4A1C_2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 4516 0 0 0 0 20
4AOB_A 0.42 0.34 0.53 10 1418 10 1 8 1 19
4ENB_A 0.44 0.20 1.00 3 469 0 0 0 0 12
4ENC_A 0.57 0.33 1.00 5 491 0 0 0 0 10
4FRG_B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1202 0 0 0 0 24

^top


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