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 PPfold(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

  4. Performance of Sfold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric PPfold(20) Sfold
MCC 0.812 > 0.703
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.784 ± 0.124 > 0.703 ± 0.116
Sensitivity 0.753 > 0.675
Positive Predictive Value 0.880 > 0.741
Total TP 278 > 249
Total TN 28004 > 27984
Total FP 59 < 135
Total FP CONTRA 4 < 23
Total FP INCONS 34 < 64
Total FP COMP 21 < 48
Total FN 91 < 120
P-value 1.18011954625e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of PPfold(20) and Sfold. 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 PPfold(20) and Sfold).

  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 PPfold(20) and Sfold).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for PPfold(20) and Sfold. 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 PPfold(20) and Sfold).

^top





Performance of PPfold(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 278
Total TN 28004
Total FP 59
Total FP CONTRA 4
Total FP INCONS 34
Total FP COMP 21
Total FN 91
Total Scores
MCC 0.812
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.784 ± 0.124
Sensitivity 0.753
Positive Predictive Value 0.880
Nr of predictions 15

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2L94_A 0.66 0.50 0.90 9 347 1 0 1 0 9
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 1 1 0 0 1
3J2L_3 0.97 0.94 1.00 32 2988 4 0 0 4 2
3RKF_A 0.86 0.79 0.95 19 846 1 0 1 0 5
3SD1_A 0.81 0.76 0.88 22 1508 3 2 1 0 7
3ZEX_C 0.38 0.31 0.47 9 5355 14 0 10 4 20
3ZEX_D 0.93 0.91 0.94 32 2762 6 0 2 4 3
4A1C_3 0.93 0.92 0.94 34 2727 2 0 2 0 3
4A1C_2 0.27 0.25 0.29 5 4499 16 1 11 4 15
4AOB_A 0.87 0.83 0.92 24 1411 4 0 2 2 5
4ENB_A 0.63 0.47 0.88 7 464 1 0 1 0 8
4ENC_A 0.64 0.53 0.80 8 486 2 0 2 0 7
4FRG_B 0.84 0.75 0.95 18 1183 1 0 1 0 6

^top



Performance of Sfold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Sfold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 249
Total TN 27984
Total FP 135
Total FP CONTRA 23
Total FP INCONS 64
Total FP COMP 48
Total FN 120
Total Scores
MCC 0.703
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.703 ± 0.116
Sensitivity 0.675
Positive Predictive Value 0.741
Nr of predictions 15

^top



2. Individual counts for Sfold [ 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
3AMU_B 0.81 0.79 0.83 15 1139 6 0 3 3 4
3J20_1 0.75 0.75 0.75 15 1092 7 0 5 2 5
3J20_0 0.51 0.57 0.48 12 1194 14 3 10 1 9
3J2L_3 0.80 0.82 0.78 28 2984 12 1 7 4 6
3RKF_A 0.91 0.83 1.00 20 846 0 0 0 0 4
3SD1_A 0.78 0.72 0.84 21 1508 4 2 2 0 8
3ZEX_C 0.41 0.34 0.50 10 5354 27 2 8 17 19
3ZEX_D 0.85 0.80 0.90 28 2765 8 0 3 5 7
4A1C_3 0.83 0.81 0.86 30 2728 7 0 5 2 7
4A1C_2 0.21 0.25 0.19 5 4489 34 8 14 12 15
4AOB_A 0.60 0.59 0.63 17 1410 11 4 6 1 12
4ENB_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 461 0 0 0 0 4
4ENC_A 0.57 0.33 1.00 5 491 0 0 0 0 10
4FRG_B 0.67 0.58 0.78 14 1184 4 3 1 0 10

^top


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