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 Murlet(seed) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric TurboFold(seed) Murlet(seed)
MCC 0.611 > 0.546
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.617 ± 0.223 > 0.541 ± 0.148
Sensitivity 0.578 > 0.373
Positive Predictive Value 0.657 < 0.808
Total TP 130 > 84
Total TN 17229 < 17323
Total FP 86 > 22
Total FP CONTRA 20 > 2
Total FP INCONS 48 > 18
Total FP COMP 18 > 2
Total FN 95 < 141
P-value 1.03576421863e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

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

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

  4. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for TurboFold(seed) and Murlet(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 Murlet(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 130
Total TN 17229
Total FP 86
Total FP CONTRA 20
Total FP INCONS 48
Total FP COMP 18
Total FN 95
Total Scores
MCC 0.611
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.617 ± 0.223
Sensitivity 0.578
Positive Predictive Value 0.657
Nr of predictions 10

^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_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 Murlet(seed) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 84
Total TN 17323
Total FP 22
Total FP CONTRA 2
Total FP INCONS 18
Total FP COMP 2
Total FN 141
Total Scores
MCC 0.546
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.541 ± 0.148
Sensitivity 0.373
Positive Predictive Value 0.808
Nr of predictions 10

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2L94_A 0.57 0.39 0.88 7 349 2 0 1 1 11
2LC8_A -0.03 0.00 0.00 0 516 12 0 12 0 18
3RKF_A 0.62 0.50 0.80 12 851 3 1 2 0 12
3SD1_A 0.56 0.38 0.85 11 1520 2 0 2 0 18
3ZEX_C 0.49 0.24 1.00 7 5367 0 0 0 0 22
4A1C_2 0.59 0.35 1.00 7 4509 0 0 0 0 13
4AOB_A 0.69 0.48 1.00 14 1423 1 0 0 1 15
4ENB_A 0.63 0.40 1.00 6 466 0 0 0 0 9
4ENC_A 0.63 0.40 1.00 6 490 0 0 0 0 9
4FRN_A 0.66 0.50 0.88 14 1832 2 1 1 0 14

^top


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