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 TurboFold(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric TurboFold(seed) HotKnots
MCC 0.647 > 0.625
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.639 ± 0.205 < 0.684 ± 0.224
Sensitivity 0.615 < 0.653
Positive Predictive Value 0.691 > 0.609
Total TP 161 < 171
Total TN 19957 > 19909
Total FP 92 < 129
Total FP CONTRA 20 < 34
Total FP INCONS 52 < 76
Total FP COMP 20 > 19
Total FN 101 > 91
P-value 7.88120811869e-05

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of TurboFold(seed) and HotKnots. 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 TurboFold(seed) and HotKnots).

  2. Comparison of performance of TurboFold(seed) and HotKnots. 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 TurboFold(seed) and HotKnots).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for TurboFold(seed) and HotKnots. 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 TurboFold(seed) and HotKnots).

  4. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for TurboFold(seed) and HotKnots. 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 TurboFold(seed) and HotKnots).

^top





Performance of TurboFold(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 161
Total TN 19957
Total FP 92
Total FP CONTRA 20
Total FP INCONS 52
Total FP COMP 20
Total FN 101
Total Scores
MCC 0.647
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.639 ± 0.205
Sensitivity 0.615
Positive Predictive Value 0.691
Nr of predictions 11

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2L94_A 0.94 0.94 0.94 17 339 2 0 1 1 1
2LC8_A -0.03 0.00 0.00 0 513 15 3 12 0 18
3RKF_A 0.91 0.83 1.00 20 846 0 0 0 0 4
3SD1_A 0.71 0.69 0.74 20 1506 7 2 5 0 9
3ZEX_C 0.49 0.45 0.54 13 5350 15 2 9 4 16
4A1C_3 0.86 0.84 0.89 31 2728 6 0 4 2 6
4A1C_2 0.20 0.25 0.17 5 4486 37 9 16 12 15
4AOB_A 0.67 0.59 0.77 17 1415 6 2 3 1 12
4ENB_A 0.77 0.60 1.00 9 463 0 0 0 0 6
4ENC_A 0.73 0.60 0.90 9 486 1 1 0 0 6
4FRN_A 0.79 0.71 0.87 20 1825 3 1 2 0 8

^top



Performance of HotKnots - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for HotKnots

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 171
Total TN 19909
Total FP 129
Total FP CONTRA 34
Total FP INCONS 76
Total FP COMP 19
Total FN 91
Total Scores
MCC 0.625
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.684 ± 0.224
Sensitivity 0.653
Positive Predictive Value 0.609
Nr of predictions 11

^top



2. Individual counts for HotKnots [ 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
2LC8_A 0.64 0.61 0.69 11 512 5 0 5 0 7
3RKF_A 0.91 0.83 1.00 20 846 0 0 0 0 4
3SD1_A 0.77 0.76 0.79 22 1505 6 4 2 0 7
3ZEX_C -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 5328 46 11 35 0 29
4A1C_3 0.88 0.86 0.89 32 2727 7 0 4 3 5
4A1C_2 0.19 0.25 0.15 5 4483 42 12 16 14 15
4AOB_A 0.60 0.59 0.63 17 1410 11 4 6 1 12
4ENB_A 1.00 1.00 1.00 15 457 0 0 0 0 0
4ENC_A 0.97 1.00 0.94 15 480 1 1 0 0 0
4FRN_A 0.59 0.57 0.62 16 1822 10 2 8 0 12

^top


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