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 CRWrnafold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric CRWrnafold Fold
MCC 0.585 > 0.573
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.639 ± 0.123 > 0.613 ± 0.130
Sensitivity 0.522 > 0.514
Positive Predictive Value 0.663 > 0.645
Total TP 343 > 338
Total TN 69824 > 69817
Total FP 196 < 210
Total FP CONTRA 24 < 25
Total FP INCONS 150 < 161
Total FP COMP 22 < 24
Total FN 314 < 319
P-value 3.85233844192e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of CRWrnafold and Fold. 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 CRWrnafold and Fold).

  2. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for CRWrnafold and Fold. 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 CRWrnafold and Fold).

^top





Performance of CRWrnafold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for CRWrnafold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 343
Total TN 69824
Total FP 196
Total FP CONTRA 24
Total FP INCONS 150
Total FP COMP 22
Total FN 314
Total Scores
MCC 0.585
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.639 ± 0.123
Sensitivity 0.522
Positive Predictive Value 0.663
Nr of predictions 32

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LBS_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 14 482 0 0 0 0 0
2LC8_A -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1525 15 2 13 0 20
2LDL_A - 0.85 0.73 1.00 8 343 1 0 0 1 3
2LDT_A - 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 454 0 0 0 0 4
2LHP_A - 0.93 0.88 1.00 14 652 0 0 0 0 2
2LI4_A - 0.93 0.88 1.00 14 482 0 0 0 0 2
2LK3_A - 0.95 0.90 1.00 9 267 0 0 0 0 1
2LKR_A - 0.52 0.44 0.63 17 6078 12 2 8 2 22
2LQZ_A - 0.85 0.82 0.90 9 341 1 1 0 0 2
2YIE_Z - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1525 15 3 12 0 12
2YIE_X - 0.36 0.33 0.40 4 1368 9 2 4 3 8
3AMU_B 0.67 0.59 0.76 16 2982 7 0 5 2 11
3J0L_7 - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1212 13 0 13 0 17
3J0L_g - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 461 4 1 3 0 4
3J0L_2 - 0.25 0.24 0.28 8 6187 23 2 19 2 25
3J0L_h - 0.81 0.65 1.00 28 6077 0 0 0 0 15
3J0L_a - 0.39 0.31 0.50 5 1118 5 1 4 0 11
3J0L_8 - 0.93 0.88 1.00 7 183 0 0 0 0 1
3J0L_1 - 0.76 0.63 0.92 12 1212 3 0 1 2 7
3J16_L 0.84 0.70 1.00 21 2754 0 0 0 0 9
3SD1_A 0.52 0.45 0.61 19 3885 12 2 10 0 23
3SN2_B 0.96 0.92 1.00 11 395 0 0 0 0 1
3TRZ_Z - 0.91 0.83 1.00 5 205 0 0 0 0 1
3TS0_U - 1.00 1.00 1.00 6 247 0 0 0 0 0
3TS2_V - 1.00 1.00 1.00 5 271 0 0 0 0 0
3U4M_B - 0.38 0.32 0.46 12 3134 14 0 14 0 25
4A1C_3 0.70 0.59 0.84 32 7102 6 0 6 0 22
4A1C_2 0.13 0.15 0.13 5 11741 44 4 31 9 28
4A4U_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 222 0 0 0 0 0
4AOB_A 0.59 0.48 0.74 20 4344 8 2 5 1 22
4ENB_A 0.70 0.58 0.85 11 1262 2 1 1 0 8
4ENC_A 0.70 0.58 0.85 11 1313 2 1 1 0 8

^top



Performance of Fold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Fold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 338
Total TN 69817
Total FP 210
Total FP CONTRA 25
Total FP INCONS 161
Total FP COMP 24
Total FN 319
Total Scores
MCC 0.573
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.613 ± 0.130
Sensitivity 0.514
Positive Predictive Value 0.645
Nr of predictions 32

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LBS_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 14 482 0 0 0 0 0
2LC8_A -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1525 15 2 13 0 20
2LDL_A - 0.90 0.82 1.00 9 342 1 0 0 1 2
2LDT_A - 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 454 0 0 0 0 4
2LHP_A - 0.97 0.94 1.00 15 651 0 0 0 0 1
2LI4_A - 0.93 0.88 1.00 14 482 0 0 0 0 2
2LK3_A - 0.95 0.90 1.00 9 267 0 0 0 0 1
2LKR_A - 0.85 0.79 0.91 31 6071 5 0 3 2 8
2LQZ_A - 0.85 0.82 0.90 9 341 1 1 0 0 2
2YIE_Z - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1525 15 3 12 0 12
2YIE_X - 0.25 0.25 0.27 3 1367 8 2 6 0 9
3AMU_B 0.64 0.59 0.70 16 2980 9 0 7 2 11
3J0L_7 - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1213 12 0 12 0 17
3J0L_g - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 461 4 1 3 0 4
3J0L_2 - 0.25 0.24 0.26 8 6185 25 2 21 2 25
3J0L_h - 0.81 0.65 1.00 28 6077 2 0 0 2 15
3J0L_a - 0.20 0.19 0.23 3 1115 10 2 8 0 13
3J0L_8 - 0.93 0.88 1.00 7 183 0 0 0 0 1
3J0L_1 - 0.76 0.63 0.92 12 1212 2 0 1 1 7
3J16_L 0.63 0.53 0.76 16 2754 5 0 5 0 14
3SD1_A 0.57 0.48 0.69 20 3887 9 1 8 0 22
3SN2_B 1.00 1.00 1.00 12 394 0 0 0 0 0
3TRZ_Z - 0.91 0.83 1.00 5 205 1 0 0 1 1
3TS0_U - 1.00 1.00 1.00 6 247 1 0 0 1 0
3TS2_V - 1.00 1.00 1.00 5 271 0 0 0 0 0
3U4M_B - 0.45 0.35 0.59 13 3138 9 1 8 0 24
4A1C_3 0.68 0.57 0.82 31 7102 7 1 6 0 23
4A1C_2 0.14 0.15 0.14 5 11744 43 5 27 11 28
4A4U_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 222 0 0 0 0 0
4AOB_A 0.50 0.40 0.63 17 4344 11 2 8 1 25
4ENB_A 0.32 0.26 0.42 5 1263 7 1 6 0 14
4ENC_A 0.31 0.26 0.38 5 1313 8 1 7 0 14

^top


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