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 CentroidHomfold‑LAST - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

  5. Compile and download dataset for CentroidHomfold‑LAST & UNAFold [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric CentroidHomfold‑LAST UNAFold
MCC 0.577 > 0.494
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.538 ± 0.171 > 0.490 ± 0.123
Sensitivity 0.565 > 0.514
Positive Predictive Value 0.601 > 0.488
Total TP 223 > 203
Total TN 28141 > 28096
Total FP 183 < 265
Total FP CONTRA 52 < 63
Total FP INCONS 96 < 150
Total FP COMP 35 < 52
Total FN 172 < 192
P-value 2.30549897711e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of CentroidHomfold-LAST and UNAFold. 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 CentroidHomfold‑LAST and UNAFold).

  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 CentroidHomfold‑LAST and UNAFold).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for CentroidHomfold-LAST and UNAFold. 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 CentroidHomfold‑LAST and UNAFold).

^top





Performance of CentroidHomfold‑LAST - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for CentroidHomfold‑LAST

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 223
Total TN 28141
Total FP 183
Total FP CONTRA 52
Total FP INCONS 96
Total FP COMP 35
Total FN 172
Total Scores
MCC 0.577
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.538 ± 0.171
Sensitivity 0.565
Positive Predictive Value 0.601
Nr of predictions 19

^top



2. Individual counts for CentroidHomfold‑LAST [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A -0.03 0.00 0.00 0 517 11 0 11 0 18
2M58_A - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 539 5 0 5 0 12
3J0L_a - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 408 3 1 2 0 11
3J20_0 0.41 0.52 0.34 11 1187 22 7 14 1 10
3J3D_C 0.73 0.79 0.68 15 946 7 3 4 0 4
3J3E_8 0.07 0.07 0.09 1 2731 16 4 6 6 14
3J3F_8 0.36 0.47 0.27 9 4728 36 11 13 12 10
3RKF_A 0.86 0.75 1.00 18 848 0 0 0 0 6
3SD1_A 0.77 0.66 0.90 19 1512 2 1 1 0 10
3U4M_B - 0.78 0.73 0.84 16 1257 4 0 3 1 6
3W3S_B 0.94 0.88 1.00 29 1960 1 0 0 1 4
4A1C_2 0.24 0.25 0.24 5 4495 29 8 8 13 15
4AOB_A 0.85 0.72 1.00 21 1416 1 0 0 1 8
4ENB_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 461 0 0 0 0 4
4ENC_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 485 0 0 0 0 4
4FRG_B 0.43 0.50 0.40 12 1172 18 6 12 0 12
4FRN_A 0.37 0.46 0.32 13 1807 28 11 17 0 15
4JF2_A 0.89 0.79 1.00 19 1063 0 0 0 0 5
4JRC_A - 0.87 0.76 1.00 13 609 0 0 0 0 4

^top



Performance of UNAFold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for UNAFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 203
Total TN 28096
Total FP 265
Total FP CONTRA 63
Total FP INCONS 150
Total FP COMP 52
Total FN 192
Total Scores
MCC 0.494
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.490 ± 0.123
Sensitivity 0.514
Positive Predictive Value 0.488
Nr of predictions 19

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A -0.03 0.00 0.00 0 513 15 3 12 0 18
2M58_A - 0.60 0.58 0.64 7 533 4 1 3 0 5
3J0L_a - 0.55 0.64 0.50 7 397 8 5 2 1 4
3J20_0 0.51 0.57 0.48 12 1194 14 3 10 1 9
3J3D_C 0.33 0.37 0.32 7 946 15 3 12 0 12
3J3E_8 0.15 0.20 0.13 3 2718 32 6 15 11 12
3J3F_8 0.32 0.42 0.25 8 4729 44 12 12 20 11
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
3W3S_B 0.61 0.61 0.63 20 1957 13 4 8 1 13
4A1C_2 0.19 0.25 0.15 5 4483 42 11 17 14 15
4AOB_A 0.60 0.59 0.63 17 1410 11 4 6 1 12
4ENB_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 461 2 0 0 2 4
4ENC_A 0.37 0.33 0.45 5 485 7 0 6 1 10
4FRG_B 0.36 0.38 0.38 9 1178 15 2 13 0 15
4FRN_A 0.48 0.46 0.52 13 1823 12 2 10 0 15
4JF2_A 0.89 0.79 1.00 19 1063 0 0 0 0 5
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.