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 UNAFold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

  5. Compile and download dataset for UNAFold & RNASLOpt [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric UNAFold RNASLOpt
MCC 0.638 > 0.580
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.675 ± 0.098 > 0.634 ± 0.104
Sensitivity 0.660 > 0.559
Positive Predictive Value 0.623 > 0.608
Total TP 616 > 522
Total TN 105822 < 105952
Total FP 524 > 429
Total FP CONTRA 115 > 114
Total FP INCONS 257 > 222
Total FP COMP 152 > 93
Total FN 317 < 411
P-value 3.56938820447e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of UNAFold and RNASLOpt. 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 UNAFold and RNASLOpt).

  2. Comparison of performance of UNAFold and RNASLOpt. 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 UNAFold and RNASLOpt).

  3. 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 UNAFold and RNASLOpt).

  4. 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 UNAFold and RNASLOpt).

  5. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for UNAFold and RNASLOpt. 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 UNAFold and RNASLOpt).

  6. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for UNAFold and RNASLOpt. 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 UNAFold and RNASLOpt).

^top





Performance of UNAFold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for UNAFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 616
Total TN 105822
Total FP 524
Total FP CONTRA 115
Total FP INCONS 257
Total FP COMP 152
Total FN 317
Total Scores
MCC 0.638
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.675 ± 0.098
Sensitivity 0.660
Positive Predictive Value 0.623
Nr of predictions 47

^top



2. Individual counts for UNAFold [ 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
2LDL_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 131 1 0 0 1 0
2LHP_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 15 246 0 0 0 0 0
2LI4_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 14 175 0 0 0 0 0
2LJJ_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 7 123 3 0 0 3 0
2LK3_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 91 0 0 0 0 0
2LKR_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 29 2411 6 0 0 6 0
2LQZ_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 8 124 2 0 0 2 0
2LWK_A - 0.95 0.91 1.00 10 197 1 0 0 1 1
3J0L_a - 0.55 0.64 0.50 7 397 8 5 2 1 4
3J0L_g - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 174 4 0 2 2 2
3J0L_7 - 0.66 0.70 0.64 7 508 5 2 2 1 3
3J0L_h - 0.87 0.81 0.93 26 2112 4 1 1 2 6
3J0L_8 - 1.00 1.00 1.00 7 69 0 0 0 0 0
3J0L_1 - 0.75 0.69 0.82 9 473 4 0 2 2 4
3J0L_2 - 0.30 0.31 0.31 8 2224 25 2 16 7 18
3J16_L 0.31 0.33 0.30 7 1136 16 3 13 0 14
3J20_1 0.75 0.75 0.75 15 1092 6 0 5 1 5
3J20_0 0.51 0.57 0.48 12 1194 14 3 10 1 9
3J2C_M - 0.75 0.80 0.71 77 39816 68 13 19 36 19
3J2C_O - 0.60 0.61 0.60 25 3945 22 7 10 5 16
3J2L_3 0.80 0.82 0.78 28 2984 12 1 7 4 6
3SN2_B 0.95 0.92 1.00 11 143 0 0 0 0 1
3TRZ_Z - 1.00 1.00 1.00 5 87 1 0 0 1 0
3TS0_U - 1.00 1.00 1.00 6 112 1 0 0 1 0
3TS2_V - 1.00 1.00 1.00 5 103 0 0 0 0 0
3U4M_B - 0.49 0.55 0.46 12 1250 14 3 11 0 10
3UZL_B 0.49 0.50 0.50 8 1277 15 0 8 7 8
3VJR_D - 1.00 1.00 1.00 12 239 0 0 0 0 0
3W3S_B 0.61 0.61 0.63 20 1957 13 4 8 1 13
3ZEX_F - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 908 11 2 4 5 4
3ZEX_G - 0.97 0.93 1.00 42 6465 17 0 0 17 3
3ZEX_E - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 8255 54 17 32 5 34
3ZEX_D 0.88 0.83 0.94 29 2765 6 0 2 4 6
3ZEX_H - 0.25 0.37 0.18 7 3586 32 20 12 0 12
3ZEX_C 0.30 0.34 0.26 10 5336 43 5 23 15 19
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 11 17 14 15
4A4U_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 96 0 0 0 0 0
4AOB_A 0.60 0.59 0.63 17 1410 11 4 6 1 12
4ATO_G - 0.38 0.43 0.38 3 212 5 5 0 0 4
4ENB_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 461 2 0 0 2 4
4ENC_A 0.37 0.33 0.45 5 485 7 0 6 1 10
4FNJ_A - 0.91 0.83 1.00 10 240 0 0 0 0 2
4FRG_B 0.36 0.38 0.38 9 1178 15 2 13 0 15
4FRN_A 0.48 0.46 0.52 13 1823 12 2 10 0 15
4HXH_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 6 89 0 0 0 0 0

^top



Performance of RNASLOpt - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNASLOpt

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 522
Total TN 105952
Total FP 429
Total FP CONTRA 114
Total FP INCONS 222
Total FP COMP 93
Total FN 411
Total Scores
MCC 0.580
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.634 ± 0.104
Sensitivity 0.559
Positive Predictive Value 0.608
Nr of predictions 47

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.48 0.39 0.64 7 517 4 0 4 0 11
2LDL_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 131 1 0 0 1 0
2LHP_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 15 246 0 0 0 0 0
2LI4_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 14 175 0 0 0 0 0
2LJJ_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 7 123 3 0 0 3 0
2LK3_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 91 0 0 0 0 0
2LKR_A - 0.70 0.69 0.71 20 2412 13 1 7 5 9
2LQZ_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 8 124 2 0 0 2 0
2LWK_A - 0.95 0.91 1.00 10 197 1 0 0 1 1
3J0L_a - 0.21 0.18 0.29 2 404 6 3 2 1 9
3J0L_g - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 174 4 0 2 2 2
3J0L_7 - -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 506 13 3 10 0 10
3J0L_h - 0.81 0.66 1.00 21 2119 0 0 0 0 11
3J0L_8 - 0.74 0.57 1.00 4 72 0 0 0 0 3
3J0L_1 - 0.73 0.62 0.89 8 475 4 0 1 3 5
3J0L_2 - 0.49 0.46 0.52 12 2227 18 0 11 7 14
3J16_L 0.63 0.57 0.71 12 1142 5 0 5 0 9
3J20_1 1.00 1.00 1.00 20 1092 1 0 0 1 0
3J20_0 0.74 0.76 0.73 16 1197 7 3 3 1 5
3J2C_M - 0.46 0.49 0.44 47 39819 77 22 37 18 49
3J2C_O - 0.72 0.68 0.76 28 3950 13 2 7 4 13
3J2L_3 0.71 0.68 0.74 23 2989 11 0 8 3 11
3SN2_B 0.95 0.92 1.00 11 143 0 0 0 0 1
3TRZ_Z - 1.00 1.00 1.00 5 87 2 0 0 2 0
3TS0_U - 1.00 1.00 1.00 6 112 1 0 0 1 0
3TS2_V - 1.00 1.00 1.00 5 103 0 0 0 0 0
3U4M_B - 0.49 0.55 0.46 12 1250 14 3 11 0 10
3UZL_B 0.55 0.50 0.62 8 1280 9 1 4 4 8
3VJR_D - 1.00 1.00 1.00 12 239 0 0 0 0 0
3W3S_B 0.90 0.85 0.97 28 1960 2 0 1 1 5
3ZEX_F - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 914 0 0 0 0 4
3ZEX_G - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 6507 0 0 0 0 45
3ZEX_E - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 8254 55 20 30 5 34
3ZEX_D 0.86 0.74 1.00 26 2770 4 0 0 4 9
3ZEX_H - 0.27 0.37 0.21 7 3592 26 16 10 0 12
3ZEX_C 0.32 0.34 0.31 10 5342 36 8 14 14 19
4A1C_3 0.79 0.73 0.87 27 2732 5 0 4 1 10
4A1C_2 0.30 0.40 0.24 8 4482 35 13 13 9 12
4A4U_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 96 0 0 0 0 0
4AOB_A 0.31 0.28 0.38 8 1416 13 3 10 0 21
4ATO_G - 0.36 0.43 0.33 3 211 6 6 0 0 4
4ENB_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 461 0 0 0 0 4
4ENC_A 0.73 0.60 0.90 9 486 1 1 0 0 6
4FNJ_A - -0.05 0.00 0.00 0 239 11 0 11 0 12
4FRG_B 0.60 0.58 0.64 14 1180 8 3 5 0 10
4FRN_A 0.19 0.18 0.22 5 1825 18 6 12 0 23
4HXH_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 6 89 0 0 0 0 0

^top


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