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 Murlet(20) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric Fold Murlet(20)
MCC 0.589 > 0.570
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.590 ± 0.103 > 0.565 ± 0.082
Sensitivity 0.525 > 0.415
Positive Predictive Value 0.664 < 0.787
Total TP 522 > 413
Total TN 203485 < 203746
Total FP 330 > 135
Total FP CONTRA 32 > 9
Total FP INCONS 232 > 103
Total FP COMP 66 > 23
Total FN 473 < 582
P-value 5.59469103578e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

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

^top





Performance of Fold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Fold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 522
Total TN 203485
Total FP 330
Total FP CONTRA 32
Total FP INCONS 232
Total FP COMP 66
Total FN 473
Total Scores
MCC 0.589
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.590 ± 0.103
Sensitivity 0.525
Positive Predictive Value 0.664
Nr of predictions 24

^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
2L94_A 0.97 0.95 1.00 19 971 0 0 0 0 1
2XKV_B 0.51 0.50 0.53 10 4541 24 0 9 15 10
2XQD_Y 0.88 0.78 1.00 21 2829 0 0 0 0 6
2XXA_G 0.93 0.86 1.00 36 5115 0 0 0 0 6
3AMU_B 0.64 0.59 0.70 16 2980 9 0 7 2 11
3IZ4_A 0.53 0.46 0.61 61 70776 44 5 34 5 71
3IZF_C 0.70 0.59 0.82 32 6864 7 1 6 0 22
3J20_0 0.45 0.40 0.52 12 2827 12 0 11 1 18
3J20_1 0.96 0.91 1.00 21 2905 0 0 0 0 2
3J2L_3 0.62 0.53 0.74 28 7837 12 0 10 2 25
3NPB_A 0.70 0.61 0.80 28 6986 10 1 6 3 18
3O58_3 0.29 0.31 0.28 11 12363 41 3 26 12 24
3O58_2 0.71 0.71 0.71 27 7222 12 3 8 1 11
3PDR_A 0.77 0.64 0.94 46 12831 5 0 3 2 26
3RKF_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2191 0 0 0 0 14
3SD1_A 0.57 0.48 0.69 20 3887 9 1 8 0 22
3ZEX_C 0.22 0.21 0.24 11 14151 45 4 30 11 41
3ZEX_D 0.76 0.67 0.87 33 6983 5 1 4 0 16
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
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
4FRG_B 0.24 0.22 0.27 7 3460 19 3 16 0 25

^top



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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 413
Total TN 203746
Total FP 135
Total FP CONTRA 9
Total FP INCONS 103
Total FP COMP 23
Total FN 582
Total Scores
MCC 0.570
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.565 ± 0.082
Sensitivity 0.415
Positive Predictive Value 0.787
Nr of predictions 24

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2L94_A 0.53 0.50 0.59 10 973 7 0 7 0 10
2XKV_B 0.45 0.20 1.00 4 4556 3 0 0 3 16
2XQD_Y 0.80 0.70 0.90 19 2829 2 0 2 0 8
2XXA_G 0.41 0.17 1.00 7 5144 0 0 0 0 35
3AMU_B 0.77 0.67 0.90 18 2983 3 0 2 1 9
3IZ4_A 0.40 0.24 0.65 32 70827 21 1 16 4 100
3IZF_C 0.71 0.56 0.91 30 6870 4 0 3 1 24
3J20_0 0.58 0.47 0.74 14 2831 5 0 5 0 16
3J20_1 0.68 0.57 0.81 13 2910 3 0 3 0 10
3J2L_3 0.69 0.49 0.96 26 7848 3 0 1 2 27
3NPB_A 0.55 0.35 0.89 16 7003 2 1 1 0 30
3O58_3 0.33 0.23 0.47 8 12386 12 2 7 3 27
3O58_2 0.89 0.82 0.97 31 7228 2 0 1 1 7
3PDR_A 0.70 0.53 0.93 38 12839 3 0 3 0 34
3RKF_A 0.68 0.47 1.00 16 2195 0 0 0 0 18
3SD1_A 0.68 0.57 0.83 24 3887 5 1 4 0 18
3ZEX_C 0.34 0.23 0.50 12 14172 15 1 11 3 40
3ZEX_D 0.77 0.65 0.91 32 6986 3 0 3 0 17
4A1C_3 0.59 0.41 0.85 22 7114 4 0 4 0 32
4A1C_2 0.17 0.15 0.20 5 11756 24 2 18 4 28
4AOB_A 0.72 0.55 0.96 23 4347 2 0 1 1 19
4ENB_A 0.46 0.21 1.00 4 1271 0 0 0 0 15
4ENC_A 0.51 0.26 1.00 5 1321 0 0 0 0 14
4FRG_B 0.17 0.13 0.25 4 3470 12 1 11 0 28

^top


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