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 Fold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric Fold CMfinder(20)
MCC 0.556 > 0.546
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.518 ± 0.361 < 0.560 ± 0.222
Sensitivity 0.488 > 0.366
Positive Predictive Value 0.640 < 0.822
Total TP 80 > 60
Total TN 21107 < 21159
Total FP 48 > 15
Total FP CONTRA 4 > 1
Total FP INCONS 41 > 12
Total FP COMP 3 > 2
Total FN 84 < 104
P-value 0.0

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of Fold and CMfinder(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 Fold and CMfinder(20)).

  2. Comparison of performance of Fold and CMfinder(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 Fold and CMfinder(20)).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for Fold and CMfinder(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 Fold and CMfinder(20)).

  4. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for Fold and CMfinder(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 Fold and CMfinder(20)).

^top





Performance of Fold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Fold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 80
Total TN 21107
Total FP 48
Total FP CONTRA 4
Total FP INCONS 41
Total FP COMP 3
Total FN 84
Total Scores
MCC 0.556
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.518 ± 0.361
Sensitivity 0.488
Positive Predictive Value 0.640
Nr of predictions 4

^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
3J20_0 0.45 0.40 0.52 12 2827 12 0 11 1 18
3J2L_3 0.62 0.53 0.74 28 7837 12 0 10 2 25
3ZEX_D 0.76 0.67 0.87 33 6983 5 1 4 0 16
4FRG_B 0.24 0.22 0.27 7 3460 19 3 16 0 25

^top



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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 60
Total TN 21159
Total FP 15
Total FP CONTRA 1
Total FP INCONS 12
Total FP COMP 2
Total FN 104
Total Scores
MCC 0.546
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.560 ± 0.222
Sensitivity 0.366
Positive Predictive Value 0.822
Nr of predictions 4

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
3J20_0 0.75 0.57 1.00 17 2833 1 0 0 1 13
3J2L_3 0.45 0.32 0.63 17 7848 11 1 9 1 36
3ZEX_D 0.58 0.39 0.86 19 6999 3 0 3 0 30
4FRG_B 0.47 0.22 1.00 7 3479 0 0 0 0 25

^top


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