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 Carnac(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric Carnac(20) Afold
MCC 0.648 > 0.547
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.583 ± 0.231 > 0.562 ± 0.223
Sensitivity 0.443 < 0.579
Positive Predictive Value 0.953 > 0.524
Total TP 141 < 184
Total TN 45102 > 44899
Total FP 14 < 221
Total FP CONTRA 3 < 57
Total FP INCONS 4 < 110
Total FP COMP 7 < 54
Total FN 177 > 134
P-value 8.01312059156e-09

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of Carnac(20) and Afold. 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 Carnac(20) and Afold).

  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 Carnac(20) and Afold).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for Carnac(20) and Afold. 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 Carnac(20) and Afold).

^top





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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 141
Total TN 45102
Total FP 14
Total FP CONTRA 3
Total FP INCONS 4
Total FP COMP 7
Total FN 177
Total Scores
MCC 0.648
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.583 ± 0.231
Sensitivity 0.443
Positive Predictive Value 0.953
Nr of predictions 11

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
3A2K_C 0.88 0.77 1.00 17 1091 0 0 0 0 5
3IVN_B 0.91 0.83 1.00 19 884 0 0 0 0 4
3IZ4_A 0.52 0.31 0.88 29 25503 4 3 1 0 66
3J3E_8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2742 0 0 0 0 15
3JYV_7 0.81 0.70 0.93 14 1096 3 0 1 2 6
3LA5_A 0.91 0.84 1.00 21 933 0 0 0 0 4
3NPB_A 0.46 0.22 1.00 8 2270 3 0 0 3 29
3O58_3 0.60 0.36 1.00 8 4756 1 0 0 1 14
3RKF_A 0.91 0.83 1.00 20 846 0 0 0 0 4
4A1C_2 0.42 0.25 0.71 5 4509 3 0 2 1 15
4ENB_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 472 0 0 0 0 15

^top



Performance of Afold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Afold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 184
Total TN 44899
Total FP 221
Total FP CONTRA 57
Total FP INCONS 110
Total FP COMP 54
Total FN 134
Total Scores
MCC 0.547
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.562 ± 0.223
Sensitivity 0.579
Positive Predictive Value 0.524
Nr of predictions 11

^top



2. Individual counts for Afold [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
3A2K_C 0.46 0.50 0.44 11 1083 14 3 11 0 11
3IVN_B 0.91 0.83 1.00 19 884 0 0 0 0 4
3IZ4_A 0.52 0.57 0.48 54 25423 63 27 32 4 41
3J3E_8 0.26 0.33 0.21 5 2718 31 6 13 12 10
3JYV_7 -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 1088 23 4 19 0 20
3LA5_A 0.91 0.84 1.00 21 933 0 0 0 0 4
3NPB_A 0.82 0.73 0.93 27 2249 6 0 2 4 10
3O58_3 0.41 0.50 0.34 11 4732 38 6 15 17 11
3RKF_A 0.91 0.83 1.00 20 846 0 0 0 0 4
4A1C_2 0.19 0.25 0.15 5 4483 43 11 17 15 15
4ENB_A 0.81 0.73 0.92 11 460 3 0 1 2 4

^top


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