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 ContextFold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

  4. Performance of Carnac(seed) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric ContextFold Carnac(seed)
MCC 0.672 > 0.479
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.578 ± 0.131 > 0.094 ± 0.142
Sensitivity 0.553 > 0.260
Positive Predictive Value 0.816 < 0.882
Total TP 542 > 255
Total TN 1171120 < 1171495
Total FP 146 > 36
Total FP CONTRA 15 > 3
Total FP INCONS 107 > 31
Total FP COMP 24 > 2
Total FN 438 < 725
P-value 1.86109605532e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of ContextFold and Carnac(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 ContextFold and Carnac(seed)).

  2. Comparison of performance of ContextFold and Carnac(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 ContextFold and Carnac(seed)).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for ContextFold and Carnac(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 ContextFold and Carnac(seed)).

  4. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for ContextFold and Carnac(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 ContextFold and Carnac(seed)).

^top





Performance of ContextFold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for ContextFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 542
Total TN 1171120
Total FP 146
Total FP CONTRA 15
Total FP INCONS 107
Total FP COMP 24
Total FN 438
Total Scores
MCC 0.672
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.578 ± 0.131
Sensitivity 0.553
Positive Predictive Value 0.816
Nr of predictions 11

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.55 0.50 0.63 10 1524 6 0 6 0 10
3J20_2 0.73 0.61 0.87 387 1116318 63 8 52 3 246
3W3S_B 0.79 0.70 0.90 28 4722 4 0 3 1 12
3ZEX_C 0.33 0.25 0.45 13 14167 22 1 15 6 39
4A1C_3 0.78 0.63 0.97 34 7105 1 0 1 0 20
4A1C_2 0.20 0.15 0.28 5 11763 26 0 13 13 28
4AOB_A 0.52 0.40 0.68 17 4346 9 1 7 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 0.71 0.56 0.90 18 3466 2 1 1 0 14
4FRN_A 0.40 0.33 0.50 12 5127 12 3 9 0 24

^top



Performance of Carnac(seed) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 255
Total TN 1171495
Total FP 36
Total FP CONTRA 3
Total FP INCONS 31
Total FP COMP 2
Total FN 725
Total Scores
MCC 0.479
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.094 ± 0.142
Sensitivity 0.260
Positive Predictive Value 0.882
Nr of predictions 11

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.44 0.20 1.00 4 1536 0 0 0 0 16
3J20_2 0.59 0.40 0.88 251 1116480 36 3 31 2 382
3W3S_B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 4753 0 0 0 0 40
3ZEX_C 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 14196 0 0 0 0 52
4A1C_3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 7140 0 0 0 0 54
4A1C_2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 11781 0 0 0 0 33
4AOB_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 4371 0 0 0 0 42
4ENB_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1275 0 0 0 0 19
4ENC_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1326 0 0 0 0 19
4FRG_B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 3486 0 0 0 0 32
4FRN_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 5151 0 0 0 0 36

^top


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