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 HotKnots - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric CentroidFold HotKnots
MCC 0.687 > 0.589
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.681 ± 0.088 > 0.610 ± 0.096
Sensitivity 0.678 > 0.631
Positive Predictive Value 0.703 > 0.558
Total TP 671 > 625
Total TN 108746 > 108580
Total FP 363 < 582
Total FP CONTRA 113 < 189
Total FP INCONS 171 < 307
Total FP COMP 79 < 86
Total FN 319 < 365
P-value 3.56938820447e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

  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 HotKnots).

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

^top





Performance of CentroidFold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for CentroidFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 671
Total TN 108746
Total FP 363
Total FP CONTRA 113
Total FP INCONS 171
Total FP COMP 79
Total FN 319
Total Scores
MCC 0.687
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.681 ± 0.088
Sensitivity 0.678
Positive Predictive Value 0.703
Nr of predictions 38

^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
2KRL_A - 0.91 0.87 0.95 20 2003 9 1 0 8 3
2LC8_A 0.51 0.39 0.70 7 518 3 1 2 0 11
2M58_A - -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 538 6 0 6 0 12
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
3IYQ_A 0.29 0.39 0.22 20 22347 86 39 34 13 31
3IZ4_A 0.60 0.57 0.64 54 25451 38 16 15 7 41
3J0L_a - 0.41 0.36 0.50 4 403 5 3 1 1 7
3J20_0 0.54 0.57 0.52 12 1196 12 3 8 1 9
3J3D_C 0.73 0.79 0.68 15 946 7 3 4 0 4
3J3E_8 0.12 0.13 0.13 2 2726 22 4 10 8 13
3J3F_8 0.36 0.47 0.28 9 4729 37 12 11 14 10
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
3NPB_A 0.87 0.84 0.91 31 2244 8 1 2 5 6
3O58_3 0.44 0.41 0.47 9 4745 11 1 9 1 13
3PDR_A 0.88 0.86 0.90 43 4792 7 2 3 2 7
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
3U4M_B - 0.81 0.77 0.85 17 1256 5 0 3 2 5
3W1K_J 0.97 0.97 0.97 30 1647 1 1 0 0 1
3W3S_B 0.95 0.91 1.00 30 1959 1 0 0 1 3
3ZEX_C 0.48 0.34 0.67 10 5359 6 1 4 1 19
4A1C_2 0.22 0.25 0.19 5 4490 29 9 12 8 15
4AOB_A 0.50 0.48 0.54 14 1411 13 3 9 1 15
4ATO_G - 0.61 0.57 0.67 4 214 2 0 2 0 3
4ENB_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 461 1 0 0 1 4
4ENC_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 485 1 0 0 1 4
4FRG_B 0.75 0.71 0.81 17 1181 4 3 1 0 7
4FRN_A 0.80 0.71 0.91 20 1826 2 1 1 0 8
4JF2_A 0.89 0.79 1.00 19 1063 0 0 0 0 5
4JRC_A - 0.38 0.41 0.39 7 604 11 0 11 0 10

^top



Performance of HotKnots - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for HotKnots

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 625
Total TN 108580
Total FP 582
Total FP CONTRA 189
Total FP INCONS 307
Total FP COMP 86
Total FN 365
Total Scores
MCC 0.589
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.610 ± 0.096
Sensitivity 0.631
Positive Predictive Value 0.558
Nr of predictions 38

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KRL_A - 0.91 0.87 0.95 20 2003 9 1 0 8 3
2LC8_A 0.64 0.61 0.69 11 512 5 0 5 0 7
2M58_A - 0.40 0.42 0.42 5 532 7 1 6 0 7
2ZZN_D 0.93 0.95 0.91 21 961 3 2 0 1 1
3A2K_C 0.47 0.50 0.46 11 1084 13 3 10 0 11
3A3A_A 0.97 0.93 1.00 28 1472 0 0 0 0 2
3ADB_C - 0.86 0.85 0.88 28 1787 5 0 4 1 5
3GX2_A 0.81 0.79 0.85 22 1423 5 2 2 1 6
3IVN_B 0.91 0.83 1.00 19 884 0 0 0 0 4
3IWN_A 0.69 0.68 0.70 19 1445 9 1 7 1 9
3IYQ_A 0.24 0.33 0.17 17 22341 96 47 35 14 34
3IZ4_A 0.56 0.60 0.52 57 25426 57 26 27 4 38
3J0L_a - 0.55 0.64 0.50 7 397 8 5 2 1 4
3J20_0 0.54 0.57 0.52 12 1196 12 3 8 1 9
3J3D_C 0.33 0.37 0.32 7 946 15 3 12 0 12
3J3E_8 0.15 0.20 0.12 3 2717 33 7 15 11 12
3J3F_8 0.33 0.42 0.26 8 4730 43 11 12 20 11
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 - 0.69 0.74 0.67 14 714 7 0 7 0 5
3NPB_A 0.85 0.78 0.94 29 2247 6 0 2 4 8
3O58_3 0.26 0.36 0.19 8 4722 35 16 18 1 14
3PDR_A 0.81 0.80 0.82 40 4791 11 3 6 2 10
3RKF_A 0.91 0.83 1.00 20 846 0 0 0 0 4
3SD1_A 0.77 0.76 0.79 22 1505 6 4 2 0 7
3U4M_B - 0.49 0.55 0.46 12 1250 14 3 11 0 10
3W1K_J 0.97 0.97 0.97 30 1647 1 1 0 0 1
3W3S_B 0.60 0.61 0.61 20 1956 14 4 9 1 13
3ZEX_C -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 5328 46 11 35 0 29
4A1C_2 0.19 0.25 0.15 5 4483 42 12 16 14 15
4AOB_A 0.60 0.59 0.63 17 1410 11 4 6 1 12
4ATO_G - 0.72 1.00 0.54 7 207 6 6 0 0 0
4ENB_A 1.00 1.00 1.00 15 457 0 0 0 0 0
4ENC_A 0.97 1.00 0.94 15 480 1 1 0 0 0
4FRG_B 0.36 0.38 0.38 9 1178 15 2 13 0 15
4FRN_A 0.59 0.57 0.62 16 1822 10 2 8 0 12
4JF2_A 0.92 1.00 0.86 24 1054 4 4 0 0 0
4JRC_A - 0.34 0.35 0.35 6 605 11 0 11 0 11

^top


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