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 Contrafold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric Contrafold CRWrnafold
MCC 0.636 > 0.585
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.685 ± 0.105 > 0.639 ± 0.123
Sensitivity 0.559 > 0.522
Positive Predictive Value 0.731 > 0.663
Total TP 367 > 343
Total TN 69839 > 69824
Total FP 160 < 196
Total FP CONTRA 22 < 24
Total FP INCONS 113 < 150
Total FP COMP 25 > 22
Total FN 290 < 314
P-value 3.56938820447e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

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

^top





Performance of Contrafold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Contrafold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 367
Total TN 69839
Total FP 160
Total FP CONTRA 22
Total FP INCONS 113
Total FP COMP 25
Total FN 290
Total Scores
MCC 0.636
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.685 ± 0.105
Sensitivity 0.559
Positive Predictive Value 0.731
Nr of predictions 32

^top



2. Individual counts for Contrafold [ 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 0.45 0.35 0.58 7 1528 5 2 3 0 13
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 - 0.84 0.79 0.89 31 6070 6 0 4 2 8
2LQZ_A - 0.85 0.82 0.90 9 341 1 1 0 0 2
2YIE_Z - 0.43 0.42 0.45 5 1529 6 3 3 0 7
2YIE_X - 0.73 0.67 0.80 8 1368 3 1 1 1 4
3AMU_B 0.65 0.59 0.73 16 2981 8 0 6 2 11
3J0L_7 - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1218 7 0 7 0 17
3J0L_g - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 464 1 1 0 0 4
3J0L_2 - 0.25 0.24 0.28 8 6187 26 0 21 5 25
3J0L_h - 0.75 0.65 0.88 28 6073 6 0 4 2 15
3J0L_a - 0.50 0.44 0.58 7 1116 5 2 3 0 9
3J0L_8 - 0.93 0.88 1.00 7 183 0 0 0 0 1
3J0L_1 - 0.73 0.58 0.92 11 1213 2 0 1 1 8
3J16_L 0.46 0.40 0.55 12 2753 10 1 9 0 18
3SD1_A 0.57 0.48 0.69 20 3887 9 2 7 0 22
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 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 - 0.59 0.46 0.77 17 3138 5 0 5 0 20
4A1C_3 0.66 0.57 0.78 31 7100 9 1 8 0 23
4A1C_2 0.16 0.15 0.17 5 11751 33 5 20 8 28
4A4U_A - 1.00 1.00 1.00 9 222 0 0 0 0 0
4AOB_A 0.44 0.36 0.56 15 4344 13 1 11 1 27
4ENB_A 0.73 0.58 0.92 11 1263 1 1 0 0 8
4ENC_A 0.73 0.58 0.92 11 1314 1 1 0 0 8

^top



Performance of CRWrnafold - scored lower 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


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