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 MXScarna(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric MXScarna(20) Contrafold
MCC 0.624 > 0.551
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.637 ± 0.064 > 0.572 ± 0.087
Sensitivity 0.518 > 0.486
Positive Predictive Value 0.756 > 0.630
Total TP 676 > 634
Total TN 247566 > 247454
Total FP 304 < 436
Total FP CONTRA 38 < 51
Total FP INCONS 180 < 321
Total FP COMP 86 > 64
Total FN 629 < 671
P-value 3.56938820447e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of MXScarna(20) and Contrafold. 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 MXScarna(20) and Contrafold).

  2. Comparison of performance of MXScarna(20) and Contrafold. 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 MXScarna(20) and Contrafold).

  3. 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 MXScarna(20) and Contrafold).

  4. 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 MXScarna(20) and Contrafold).

  5. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for MXScarna(20) and Contrafold. 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 MXScarna(20) and Contrafold).

  6. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for MXScarna(20) and Contrafold. 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 MXScarna(20) and Contrafold).

^top





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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 676
Total TN 247566
Total FP 304
Total FP CONTRA 38
Total FP INCONS 180
Total FP COMP 86
Total FN 629
Total Scores
MCC 0.624
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.637 ± 0.064
Sensitivity 0.518
Positive Predictive Value 0.756
Nr of predictions 34

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KDQ_B 0.95 0.91 1.00 10 396 0 0 0 0 1
2L94_A 0.73 0.70 0.78 14 972 4 0 4 0 6
2WRQ_Y 0.57 0.59 0.56 10 2832 13 5 3 5 7
2XKV_B 0.45 0.20 1.00 4 4556 3 0 0 3 16
2XQD_Y 0.88 0.78 1.00 21 2829 0 0 0 0 6
2XXA_G 0.80 0.71 0.91 30 5118 4 0 3 1 12
3A2K_C 0.66 0.57 0.76 16 2905 6 1 4 1 12
3AMU_B 0.86 0.74 1.00 20 2983 2 0 0 2 7
3G4S_9 0.52 0.40 0.68 23 7347 13 1 10 2 34
3GX2_A 0.70 0.58 0.85 23 4344 5 0 4 1 17
3IVN_B 0.74 0.58 0.95 18 2327 1 1 0 0 13
3IZ4_A 0.51 0.41 0.64 54 70791 32 7 24 1 78
3IZF_C 0.67 0.59 0.76 32 6861 11 1 9 1 22
3J20_0 0.82 0.67 1.00 20 2830 0 0 0 0 10
3J20_1 0.93 0.87 1.00 20 2906 0 0 0 0 3
3J2L_3 0.54 0.42 0.71 22 7844 11 1 8 2 31
3JYV_7 0.79 0.63 1.00 20 2830 0 0 0 0 12
3JYX_4 0.33 0.30 0.37 10 12219 32 2 15 15 23
3JYX_3 0.55 0.52 0.58 14 6304 23 0 10 13 13
3LA5_A 0.78 0.62 1.00 21 2464 0 0 0 0 13
3NPB_A 0.69 0.59 0.82 27 6988 9 1 5 3 19
3O58_2 0.74 0.74 0.74 28 7222 13 4 6 3 10
3O58_3 0.52 0.40 0.67 14 12382 17 2 5 10 21
3PDR_A 0.71 0.57 0.89 41 12834 9 0 5 4 31
3RKF_A 0.72 0.53 1.00 18 2193 0 0 0 0 16
3SD1_A 0.63 0.55 0.74 23 3885 8 2 6 0 19
3ZEX_C 0.31 0.21 0.46 11 14172 13 2 11 0 41
3ZEX_D 0.68 0.63 0.74 31 6979 11 2 9 0 18
4A1C_3 0.64 0.56 0.75 30 7100 11 2 8 1 24
4A1C_2 0.18 0.15 0.21 5 11757 36 2 17 17 28
4AOB_A 0.62 0.55 0.72 23 4339 10 0 9 1 19
4ENB_A 0.26 0.11 0.67 2 1272 1 0 1 0 17
4ENC_A 0.60 0.37 1.00 7 1319 0 0 0 0 12
4FRG_B 0.55 0.44 0.70 14 3466 6 2 4 0 18

^top



Performance of Contrafold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Contrafold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 634
Total TN 247454
Total FP 436
Total FP CONTRA 51
Total FP INCONS 321
Total FP COMP 64
Total FN 671
Total Scores
MCC 0.551
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.572 ± 0.087
Sensitivity 0.486
Positive Predictive Value 0.630
Nr of predictions 34

^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
2KDQ_B 0.95 0.91 1.00 10 396 0 0 0 0 1
2L94_A 0.92 0.90 0.95 18 971 1 0 1 0 2
2WRQ_Y 0.57 0.59 0.56 10 2832 13 5 3 5 7
2XKV_B 0.51 0.50 0.53 10 4541 25 0 9 16 10
2XQD_Y 0.78 0.70 0.86 19 2828 3 0 3 0 8
2XXA_G 0.13 0.12 0.15 5 5117 29 1 28 0 37
3A2K_C 0.44 0.43 0.46 12 2900 14 2 12 0 16
3AMU_B 0.65 0.59 0.73 16 2981 8 0 6 2 11
3G4S_9 0.30 0.25 0.38 14 7344 23 1 22 0 43
3GX2_A 0.77 0.63 0.96 25 4345 2 0 1 1 15
3IVN_B 0.78 0.61 1.00 19 2327 0 0 0 0 12
3IZ4_A 0.52 0.45 0.61 60 70777 44 4 35 5 72
3IZF_C 0.68 0.61 0.77 33 6860 10 1 9 0 21
3J20_0 0.44 0.40 0.50 12 2826 13 0 12 1 18
3J20_1 0.96 0.91 1.00 21 2905 4 0 0 4 2
3J2L_3 0.56 0.49 0.65 26 7835 16 0 14 2 27
3JYV_7 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 2830 20 0 20 0 32
3JYX_4 0.20 0.21 0.20 7 12211 35 6 22 7 26
3JYX_3 0.28 0.30 0.27 8 6298 23 8 14 1 19
3LA5_A 0.78 0.62 1.00 21 2464 0 0 0 0 13
3NPB_A 0.76 0.70 0.84 32 6983 8 1 5 2 14
3O58_2 0.78 0.76 0.81 29 7224 10 2 5 3 9
3O58_3 0.28 0.26 0.31 9 12374 20 3 17 0 26
3PDR_A 0.69 0.60 0.80 43 12826 13 0 11 2 29
3RKF_A 0.73 0.59 0.91 20 2189 2 1 1 0 14
3SD1_A 0.57 0.48 0.69 20 3887 9 2 7 0 22
3ZEX_C 0.28 0.21 0.38 11 14167 22 3 15 4 41
3ZEX_D 0.73 0.67 0.80 33 6980 8 1 7 0 16
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
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
4FRG_B 0.68 0.56 0.82 18 3464 4 1 3 0 14

^top


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