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 CentroidAlifold(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

  4. Performance of TurboFold(20) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

  5. Compile and download dataset for CentroidAlifold(20) & TurboFold(20) [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric CentroidAlifold(20) TurboFold(20)
MCC 0.668 > 0.625
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.643 ± 0.104 > 0.633 ± 0.098
Sensitivity 0.515 < 0.518
Positive Predictive Value 0.870 > 0.759
Total TP 388 < 390
Total TN 113848 > 113780
Total FP 70 < 169
Total FP CONTRA 4 < 11
Total FP INCONS 54 < 113
Total FP COMP 12 < 45
Total FN 365 > 363
P-value 5.06544643719e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of CentroidAlifold(20) and TurboFold(20). 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 CentroidAlifold(20) and TurboFold(20)).

  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 CentroidAlifold(20) and TurboFold(20)).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for CentroidAlifold(20) and TurboFold(20). 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 CentroidAlifold(20) and TurboFold(20)).

^top





Performance of CentroidAlifold(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for CentroidAlifold(20)

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 388
Total TN 113848
Total FP 70
Total FP CONTRA 4
Total FP INCONS 54
Total FP COMP 12
Total FN 365
Total Scores
MCC 0.668
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.643 ± 0.104
Sensitivity 0.515
Positive Predictive Value 0.870
Nr of predictions 21

^top



2. Individual counts for CentroidAlifold(20) [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2L94_A 0.61 0.55 0.69 11 974 5 0 5 0 9
3AMU_B 0.86 0.74 1.00 20 2983 1 0 0 1 7
3J20_1 0.96 0.91 1.00 21 2905 0 0 0 0 2
3J20_0 0.84 0.70 1.00 21 2829 1 0 0 1 9
3J2L_3 0.76 0.58 1.00 31 7844 2 0 0 2 22
3J3D_C 0.82 0.71 0.95 20 2754 1 0 1 0 8
3J3E_7 0.64 0.56 0.75 30 7100 10 0 10 0 24
3J3E_8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 7499 4 0 4 0 33
3J3F_8 0.39 0.25 0.60 9 12231 6 1 5 0 27
3J3F_7 0.79 0.68 0.92 34 7223 4 0 3 1 16
3RKF_A 0.72 0.53 1.00 18 2193 0 0 0 0 16
3SD1_A 0.71 0.52 0.96 22 3893 1 0 1 0 20
3ZEX_C 0.38 0.21 0.69 11 14180 5 1 4 0 41
3ZEX_D 0.80 0.69 0.92 34 6984 3 0 3 0 15
3ZND_W 0.47 0.43 0.53 10 2984 12 0 9 3 13
4A1C_3 0.76 0.63 0.92 34 7103 4 0 3 1 20
4A1C_2 0.26 0.15 0.45 5 11770 8 1 5 2 28
4AOB_A 0.75 0.57 1.00 24 4347 1 0 0 1 18
4ENB_A 0.69 0.47 1.00 9 1266 0 0 0 0 10
4ENC_A 0.60 0.37 1.00 7 1319 0 0 0 0 12
4FRG_B 0.69 0.53 0.89 17 3467 2 1 1 0 15

^top



Performance of TurboFold(20) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for TurboFold(20)

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 390
Total TN 113780
Total FP 169
Total FP CONTRA 11
Total FP INCONS 113
Total FP COMP 45
Total FN 363
Total Scores
MCC 0.625
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.633 ± 0.098
Sensitivity 0.518
Positive Predictive Value 0.759
Nr of predictions 21

^top



2. Individual counts for TurboFold(20) [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2L94_A 0.92 0.90 0.95 18 971 1 0 1 0 2
3AMU_B 0.70 0.59 0.84 16 2984 5 0 3 2 11
3J20_1 0.96 0.91 1.00 21 2905 0 0 0 0 2
3J20_0 0.66 0.57 0.77 17 2828 6 0 5 1 13
3J2L_3 0.74 0.58 0.94 31 7842 5 0 2 3 22
3J3D_C 0.82 0.71 0.95 20 2754 1 0 1 0 8
3J3E_7 0.65 0.54 0.78 29 7103 8 1 7 0 25
3J3E_8 0.17 0.15 0.21 5 7479 28 2 17 9 28
3J3F_8 0.38 0.36 0.39 13 12213 34 2 18 14 23
3J3F_7 0.79 0.68 0.92 34 7223 4 0 3 1 16
3RKF_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2191 0 0 0 0 14
3SD1_A 0.59 0.48 0.74 20 3889 7 1 6 0 22
3ZEX_C 0.39 0.27 0.56 14 14171 14 2 9 3 38
3ZEX_D 0.76 0.63 0.91 31 6987 3 0 3 0 18
3ZND_W 0.43 0.39 0.47 9 2984 12 1 9 2 14
4A1C_3 0.69 0.57 0.84 31 7103 6 0 6 0 23
4A1C_2 0.18 0.15 0.21 5 11757 28 0 19 9 28
4AOB_A 0.56 0.40 0.77 17 4349 6 1 4 1 25
4ENB_A 0.69 0.47 1.00 9 1266 0 0 0 0 10
4ENC_A 0.65 0.47 0.90 9 1316 1 1 0 0 10
4FRG_B 0.81 0.66 1.00 21 3465 0 0 0 0 11

^top


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