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 Murlet(20) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric Fold Murlet(20)
MCC 0.694 > 0.667
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.686 ± 0.112 > 0.656 ± 0.096
Sensitivity 0.715 > 0.567
Positive Predictive Value 0.680 < 0.792
Total TP 505 > 400
Total TN 75398 < 75636
Total FP 347 > 148
Total FP CONTRA 65 > 21
Total FP INCONS 173 > 84
Total FP COMP 109 > 43
Total FN 201 < 306
P-value 5.06544643719e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for Fold and Murlet(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 Murlet(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 Murlet(20) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 400
Total TN 75636
Total FP 148
Total FP CONTRA 21
Total FP INCONS 84
Total FP COMP 43
Total FN 306
Total Scores
MCC 0.667
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.656 ± 0.096
Sensitivity 0.567
Positive Predictive Value 0.792
Nr of predictions 24

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2L94_A 0.51 0.50 0.56 9 341 8 0 7 1 9
2XKV_B 0.60 0.36 1.00 4 1831 3 0 0 3 7
2XQD_Y 0.88 0.86 0.90 18 1109 3 0 2 1 3
2XXA_G 0.44 0.20 1.00 7 2038 0 0 0 0 28
3AMU_B 0.89 0.89 0.89 17 1138 4 0 2 2 2
3IZ4_A 0.46 0.33 0.66 31 25489 22 3 13 6 64
3IZF_C 0.88 0.83 0.94 29 2609 5 0 2 3 6
3J20_0 0.65 0.62 0.68 13 1200 6 1 5 0 8
3J20_1 0.69 0.60 0.80 12 1097 4 0 3 1 8
3J2L_3 0.84 0.74 0.96 25 2994 4 0 1 3 9
3NPB_A 0.65 0.43 1.00 16 2262 2 0 0 2 21
3O58_3 0.37 0.32 0.44 7 4748 13 4 5 4 15
3O58_2 1.00 1.00 1.00 31 2723 2 0 0 2 0
3PDR_A 0.84 0.76 0.93 38 4799 3 1 2 0 12
3RKF_A 0.81 0.67 1.00 16 850 0 0 0 0 8
3SD1_A 0.82 0.83 0.83 24 1504 5 4 1 0 5
3ZEX_C 0.42 0.38 0.48 11 5351 16 2 10 4 18
3ZEX_D 0.90 0.86 0.94 30 2764 5 0 2 3 5
4A1C_3 0.72 0.59 0.88 22 2738 4 0 3 1 15
4A1C_2 0.22 0.25 0.20 5 4491 24 5 15 4 15
4AOB_A 0.87 0.76 1.00 22 1415 3 0 0 3 7
4ENB_A 0.51 0.27 1.00 4 468 0 0 0 0 11
4ENC_A 0.57 0.33 1.00 5 491 0 0 0 0 10
4FRG_B 0.19 0.17 0.25 4 1186 12 1 11 0 20

^top


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