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 Mastr(seed) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric TurboFold(seed) Mastr(seed)
MCC 0.647 > 0.000
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.639 ± 0.205 > 0.000 ± 0.000
Sensitivity 0.615 > 0.000
Positive Predictive Value 0.691 > 0.000
Total TP 161 > 0
Total TN 19957 < 20190
Total FP 92 > 0
Total FP CONTRA 20 > 0
Total FP INCONS 52 > 0
Total FP COMP 20 > 0
Total FN 101 < 262
P-value 2.02510705504e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

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

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

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

^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 Mastr(seed) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 0
Total TN 20190
Total FP 0
Total FP CONTRA 0
Total FP INCONS 0
Total FP COMP 0
Total FN 262
Total Scores
MCC 0.000
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.000 ± 0.000
Sensitivity 0.000
Positive Predictive Value 0.000
Nr of predictions 11

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2L94_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 357 0 0 0 0 18
2LC8_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 528 0 0 0 0 18
3RKF_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 866 0 0 0 0 24
3SD1_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1533 0 0 0 0 29
3ZEX_C 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 5374 0 0 0 0 29
4A1C_3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2763 0 0 0 0 37
4A1C_2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 4516 0 0 0 0 20
4AOB_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1437 0 0 0 0 29
4ENB_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 472 0 0 0 0 15
4ENC_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 496 0 0 0 0 15
4FRN_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1848 0 0 0 0 28

^top


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