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 RNAwolf - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric TurboFold(seed) RNAwolf
MCC 0.637 > 0.373
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.617 ± 0.174 > 0.382 ± 0.169
Sensitivity 0.625 > 0.384
Positive Predictive Value 0.658 > 0.375
Total TP 208 > 128
Total TN 29780 > 29755
Total FP 154 < 258
Total FP CONTRA 36 < 56
Total FP INCONS 72 < 157
Total FP COMP 46 > 45
Total FN 125 < 205
P-value 2.18141491686e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

  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 TurboFold(seed) and RNAwolf).

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

^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 208
Total TN 29780
Total FP 154
Total FP CONTRA 36
Total FP INCONS 72
Total FP COMP 46
Total FN 125
Total Scores
MCC 0.637
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.617 ± 0.174
Sensitivity 0.625
Positive Predictive Value 0.658
Nr of predictions 14

^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
2LC8_A -0.03 0.00 0.00 0 513 15 3 12 0 18
3J3E_8 0.27 0.33 0.23 5 2720 28 6 11 11 10
3J3F_8 0.42 0.53 0.34 10 4732 35 9 10 16 9
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
3W1K_J 0.97 0.97 0.97 30 1647 1 1 0 0 1
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
4JF2_A 0.89 0.79 1.00 19 1063 0 0 0 0 5

^top



Performance of RNAwolf - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNAwolf

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 128
Total TN 29755
Total FP 258
Total FP CONTRA 56
Total FP INCONS 157
Total FP COMP 45
Total FN 205
Total Scores
MCC 0.373
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.382 ± 0.169
Sensitivity 0.384
Positive Predictive Value 0.375
Nr of predictions 14

^top



2. Individual counts for RNAwolf [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.52 0.50 0.56 9 512 7 0 7 0 9
3J3E_8 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 2719 37 6 17 14 15
3J3F_8 0.28 0.37 0.23 7 4730 39 9 15 15 12
3RKF_A 0.89 0.83 0.95 20 845 1 0 1 0 4
3SD1_A 0.58 0.59 0.59 17 1504 12 2 10 0 12
3W1K_J 0.81 0.77 0.86 24 1650 5 0 4 1 7
3ZEX_C 0.08 0.10 0.07 3 5328 43 18 25 0 26
4A1C_3 0.32 0.30 0.35 11 2732 21 1 19 1 26
4A1C_2 0.12 0.15 0.10 3 4487 38 12 14 12 17
4AOB_A 0.26 0.24 0.30 7 1414 17 2 14 1 22
4ENB_A 0.45 0.40 0.55 6 461 5 1 4 0 9
4ENC_A 0.34 0.33 0.38 5 483 9 0 8 1 10
4FRN_A -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1828 20 1 19 0 28
4JF2_A 0.72 0.67 0.80 16 1062 4 4 0 0 8

^top


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