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 TurboFold(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric TurboFold(seed) RNAsubopt
MCC 0.544 > 0.488
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.553 ± 0.185 > 0.497 ± 0.199
Sensitivity 0.439 > 0.426
Positive Predictive Value 0.679 > 0.566
Total TP 163 > 158
Total TN 53657 > 53618
Total FP 90 < 145
Total FP CONTRA 11 < 16
Total FP INCONS 66 < 105
Total FP COMP 13 < 24
Total FN 208 < 213
P-value 1.42300079339e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of TurboFold(seed) and RNAsubopt. 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 TurboFold(seed) and RNAsubopt).

  2. Comparison of performance of TurboFold(seed) and RNAsubopt. 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 TurboFold(seed) and RNAsubopt).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for TurboFold(seed) and RNAsubopt. 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 TurboFold(seed) and RNAsubopt).

  4. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for TurboFold(seed) and RNAsubopt. 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 TurboFold(seed) and RNAsubopt).

^top





Performance of TurboFold(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 163
Total TN 53657
Total FP 90
Total FP CONTRA 11
Total FP INCONS 66
Total FP COMP 13
Total FN 208
Total Scores
MCC 0.544
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.553 ± 0.185
Sensitivity 0.439
Positive Predictive Value 0.679
Nr of predictions 11

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2L94_A 0.92 0.90 0.95 18 971 1 0 1 0 2
2LC8_A -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1525 15 2 13 0 20
3RKF_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2191 0 0 0 0 14
3SD1_A 0.59 0.48 0.74 20 3889 7 1 6 0 22
3ZEX_C 0.39 0.27 0.56 14 14171 14 2 9 3 38
4A1C_3 0.69 0.57 0.84 31 7103 6 0 6 0 23
4A1C_2 0.15 0.15 0.15 5 11748 37 3 25 9 28
4AOB_A 0.56 0.40 0.77 17 4349 6 1 4 1 25
4ENB_A 0.69 0.47 1.00 9 1266 0 0 0 0 10
4ENC_A 0.65 0.47 0.90 9 1316 1 1 0 0 10
4FRN_A 0.69 0.56 0.87 20 5128 3 1 2 0 16

^top



Performance of RNAsubopt - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNAsubopt

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 158
Total TN 53618
Total FP 145
Total FP CONTRA 16
Total FP INCONS 105
Total FP COMP 24
Total FN 213
Total Scores
MCC 0.488
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.497 ± 0.199
Sensitivity 0.426
Positive Predictive Value 0.566
Nr of predictions 11

^top



2. Individual counts for RNAsubopt [ 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
2LC8_A -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1525 15 2 13 0 20
3RKF_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2191 0 0 0 0 14
3SD1_A 0.61 0.50 0.75 21 3888 7 1 6 0 21
3ZEX_C 0.24 0.21 0.28 11 14157 42 1 27 14 41
4A1C_3 0.70 0.59 0.82 32 7101 7 1 6 0 22
4A1C_2 0.14 0.15 0.13 5 11742 43 5 29 9 28
4AOB_A 0.52 0.43 0.64 18 4343 11 2 8 1 24
4ENB_A 0.70 0.58 0.85 11 1262 2 1 1 0 8
4ENC_A 0.32 0.26 0.42 5 1314 7 0 7 0 14
4FRN_A 0.51 0.44 0.59 16 5124 11 3 8 0 20

^top


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