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 McQFold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric McQFold Mastr(seed)
MCC 0.563 > 0.236
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.622 ± 0.078 > 0.108 ± 0.078
Sensitivity 0.489 > 0.062
Positive Predictive Value 0.652 < 0.900
Total TP 922 > 117
Total TN 351540 < 352824
Total FP 548 > 15
Total FP CONTRA 77 > 0
Total FP INCONS 415 > 13
Total FP COMP 56 > 2
Total FN 963 < 1768
P-value 3.56938820447e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of McQFold and Mastr(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 McQFold and Mastr(seed)).

  2. Comparison of performance of McQFold and Mastr(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 McQFold and Mastr(seed)).

  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 McQFold and Mastr(seed)).

  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 McQFold and Mastr(seed)).

  5. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for McQFold and Mastr(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 McQFold and Mastr(seed)).

  6. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for McQFold and Mastr(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 McQFold and Mastr(seed)).

^top





Performance of McQFold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for McQFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 922
Total TN 351540
Total FP 548
Total FP CONTRA 77
Total FP INCONS 415
Total FP COMP 56
Total FN 963
Total Scores
MCC 0.563
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.622 ± 0.078
Sensitivity 0.489
Positive Predictive Value 0.652
Nr of predictions 53

^top



2. Individual counts for McQFold [ 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
2KE6_A 0.89 0.79 1.00 15 1113 1 0 0 1 4
2KUR_A 0.87 0.76 1.00 16 1112 0 0 0 0 5
2KUU_A 0.84 0.71 1.00 15 1113 1 0 0 1 6
2KUV_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 16 1112 0 0 0 0 6
2KUW_A 0.87 0.76 1.00 16 1112 0 0 0 0 5
2KX8_A 0.88 0.83 0.94 15 845 1 0 1 0 3
2L1F_B 0.98 0.96 1.00 24 2121 0 0 0 0 1
2L1F_A 0.98 0.96 1.00 23 2057 0 0 0 0 1
2L94_A 0.97 0.95 1.00 19 971 0 0 0 0 1
2LC8_A 0.61 0.55 0.69 11 1524 5 0 5 0 9
2WRQ_Y 0.57 0.59 0.56 10 2832 13 5 3 5 7
2WWQ_V 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2926 0 0 0 0 28
2XKV_B 0.31 0.30 0.33 6 4542 25 1 11 13 14
2XQD_Y 0.88 0.78 1.00 21 2829 0 0 0 0 6
2XXA_G 0.27 0.24 0.32 10 5120 21 0 21 0 32
2ZZM_B 0.21 0.19 0.24 6 3461 19 2 17 0 26
2ZZN_D 0.84 0.78 0.91 21 2462 2 0 2 0 6
3A2K_C 0.86 0.75 1.00 21 2905 0 0 0 0 7
3A3A_A 0.87 0.76 1.00 28 3627 0 0 0 0 9
3AKZ_H 0.68 0.61 0.77 17 2679 6 1 4 1 11
3AMU_B 0.75 0.59 0.94 16 2986 3 0 1 2 11
3G4S_9 0.27 0.21 0.36 12 7348 21 1 20 0 45
3GX2_A 0.47 0.40 0.57 16 4343 13 1 11 1 24
3IVN_B 0.78 0.61 1.00 19 2327 0 0 0 0 12
3IYQ_A 0.28 0.31 0.26 29 60614 87 19 64 4 65
3IZ4_A 0.42 0.36 0.49 47 70780 53 6 43 4 85
3IZF_C 0.68 0.56 0.83 30 6867 6 0 6 0 24
3J16_L 0.75 0.57 1.00 17 2758 0 0 0 0 13
3J20_1 0.96 0.91 1.00 21 2905 0 0 0 0 2
3J20_0 0.66 0.57 0.77 17 2828 6 1 4 1 13
3J2L_3 0.56 0.43 0.72 23 7843 11 0 9 2 30
3JYV_7 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 2830 20 0 20 0 32
3JYX_3 0.21 0.22 0.20 6 6298 24 9 15 0 21
3JYX_4 0.20 0.21 0.19 7 12210 33 8 21 4 26
3LA5_A 0.78 0.62 1.00 21 2464 0 0 0 0 13
3NPB_A 0.81 0.67 0.97 31 6989 4 1 0 3 15
3O58_3 0.26 0.26 0.26 9 12368 26 10 16 0 26
3O58_2 0.83 0.71 0.96 27 7232 2 0 1 1 11
3PDR_A 0.69 0.56 0.87 40 12834 9 0 6 3 32
3RKF_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2191 0 0 0 0 14
3SD1_A 0.71 0.60 0.86 25 3887 4 0 4 0 17
3UZL_B 0.45 0.41 0.52 15 3541 14 0 14 0 22
3W3S_B 0.44 0.38 0.54 15 4725 14 0 13 1 25
3ZEX_C 0.27 0.21 0.34 11 14164 24 2 19 3 41
3ZEX_D 0.69 0.53 0.90 26 6992 3 1 2 0 23
4A1C_3 0.25 0.22 0.29 12 7099 29 1 28 0 42
4A1C_2 0.15 0.15 0.15 5 11748 33 5 23 5 28
4AOB_A 0.42 0.33 0.54 14 4345 13 1 11 1 28
4ENB_A 0.89 0.79 1.00 15 1260 0 0 0 0 4
4ENC_A 0.86 0.79 0.94 15 1310 1 1 0 0 4
4FRG_B 0.81 0.66 1.00 21 3465 0 0 0 0 11
4FRN_A 0.73 0.56 0.95 20 5130 1 1 0 0 16

^top



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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 117
Total TN 352824
Total FP 15
Total FP CONTRA 0
Total FP INCONS 13
Total FP COMP 2
Total FN 1768
Total Scores
MCC 0.236
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.108 ± 0.078
Sensitivity 0.062
Positive Predictive Value 0.900
Nr of predictions 53

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KDQ_B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 406 0 0 0 0 11
2KE6_A 0.92 0.84 1.00 16 1112 1 0 0 1 3
2KUR_A 0.79 0.71 0.88 15 1111 2 0 2 0 6
2KUU_A 0.76 0.67 0.88 14 1112 3 0 2 1 7
2KUV_A 0.77 0.68 0.88 15 1111 2 0 2 0 7
2KUW_A 0.52 0.48 0.59 10 1111 7 0 7 0 11
2KX8_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 861 0 0 0 0 18
2L1F_B 0.98 0.96 1.00 24 2121 0 0 0 0 1
2L1F_A 0.98 0.96 1.00 23 2057 0 0 0 0 1
2L94_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 990 0 0 0 0 20
2LC8_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1540 0 0 0 0 20
2WRQ_Y 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2850 0 0 0 0 17
2WWQ_V 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2926 0 0 0 0 28
2XKV_B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 4560 0 0 0 0 20
2XQD_Y 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2850 0 0 0 0 27
2XXA_G 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 5151 0 0 0 0 42
2ZZM_B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 3486 0 0 0 0 32
2ZZN_D 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2485 0 0 0 0 27
3A2K_C 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2926 0 0 0 0 28
3A3A_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 3655 0 0 0 0 37
3AKZ_H 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2701 0 0 0 0 28
3AMU_B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 3003 0 0 0 0 27
3G4S_9 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 7381 0 0 0 0 57
3GX2_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 4371 0 0 0 0 40
3IVN_B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2346 0 0 0 0 31
3IYQ_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 60726 0 0 0 0 94
3IZ4_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 70876 0 0 0 0 132
3IZF_C 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 6903 0 0 0 0 54
3J16_L 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2775 0 0 0 0 30
3J20_1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2926 0 0 0 0 23
3J20_0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2850 0 0 0 0 30
3J2L_3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 7875 0 0 0 0 53
3JYV_7 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2850 0 0 0 0 32
3JYX_3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 6328 0 0 0 0 27
3JYX_4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 12246 0 0 0 0 33
3LA5_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2485 0 0 0 0 34
3NPB_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 7021 0 0 0 0 46
3O58_3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 12403 0 0 0 0 35
3O58_2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 7260 0 0 0 0 38
3PDR_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 12880 0 0 0 0 72
3RKF_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2211 0 0 0 0 34
3SD1_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 3916 0 0 0 0 42
3UZL_B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 3570 0 0 0 0 37
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
3ZEX_D 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 7021 0 0 0 0 49
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.