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 CentroidFold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

  5. Compile and download dataset for CentroidFold & Alterna [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric CentroidFold Alterna
MCC 0.823 > 0.638
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.794 ± 0.115 > 0.607 ± 0.167
Sensitivity 0.786 > 0.633
Positive Predictive Value 0.870 > 0.658
Total TP 261 > 210
Total TN 15073 > 15054
Total FP 44 < 112
Total FP CONTRA 13 < 28
Total FP INCONS 26 < 81
Total FP COMP 5 > 3
Total FN 71 < 122
P-value 2.26346675981e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of CentroidFold and Alterna. 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 CentroidFold and Alterna).

  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 CentroidFold and Alterna).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for CentroidFold and Alterna. 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 CentroidFold and Alterna).

^top





Performance of CentroidFold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for CentroidFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 261
Total TN 15073
Total FP 44
Total FP CONTRA 13
Total FP INCONS 26
Total FP COMP 5
Total FN 71
Total Scores
MCC 0.823
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.794 ± 0.115
Sensitivity 0.786
Positive Predictive Value 0.870
Nr of predictions 14

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.51 0.39 0.70 7 518 3 1 2 0 11
2ZZN_D 0.93 0.95 0.91 21 961 3 2 0 1 1
3A2K_C 0.49 0.55 0.46 12 1082 14 3 11 0 10
3A3A_A 0.97 0.93 1.00 28 1472 0 0 0 0 2
3ADB_C - 0.98 0.97 1.00 32 1787 0 0 0 0 1
3GX2_A 0.94 0.89 1.00 25 1424 1 0 0 1 3
3IVN_B 0.91 0.83 1.00 19 884 0 0 0 0 4
3IWN_A 0.86 0.79 0.96 22 1449 1 0 1 0 6
3J0L_a - 0.41 0.36 0.50 4 403 5 3 1 1 7
3JYV_7 0.92 0.85 1.00 17 1094 2 0 0 2 3
3LA5_A 0.91 0.84 1.00 21 933 0 0 0 0 4
3NKB_B - 0.66 0.68 0.65 13 715 7 0 7 0 6
3RKF_A 0.91 0.83 1.00 20 846 0 0 0 0 4
3SD1_A 0.70 0.69 0.71 20 1505 8 4 4 0 9

^top



Performance of Alterna - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Alterna

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 210
Total TN 15054
Total FP 112
Total FP CONTRA 28
Total FP INCONS 81
Total FP COMP 3
Total FN 122
Total Scores
MCC 0.638
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.607 ± 0.167
Sensitivity 0.633
Positive Predictive Value 0.658
Nr of predictions 14

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.47 0.44 0.53 8 513 7 0 7 0 10
2ZZN_D 0.93 0.95 0.91 21 961 2 2 0 0 1
3A2K_C 0.49 0.55 0.46 12 1082 14 3 11 0 10
3A3A_A 0.93 0.87 1.00 26 1474 0 0 0 0 4
3ADB_C - 0.63 0.64 0.64 21 1786 12 1 11 0 12
3GX2_A 0.56 0.57 0.57 16 1421 13 4 8 1 12
3IVN_B 0.81 0.78 0.86 18 882 3 2 1 0 5
3IWN_A 0.81 0.79 0.85 22 1446 5 1 3 1 6
3J0L_a - 0.18 0.18 0.22 2 402 8 3 4 1 9
3JYV_7 -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 1089 22 4 18 0 20
3LA5_A 0.91 0.84 1.00 21 933 0 0 0 0 4
3NKB_B - 0.41 0.42 0.42 8 716 11 3 8 0 11
3RKF_A 0.82 0.79 0.86 19 844 3 1 2 0 5
3SD1_A 0.55 0.55 0.57 16 1505 12 4 8 0 13

^top


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