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 ContextFold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

  4. Performance of Carnac(seed) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric ContextFold Carnac(seed)
MCC 0.759 > 0.577
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.583 ± 0.154 > 0.148 ± 0.177
Sensitivity 0.740 > 0.357
Positive Predictive Value 0.780 < 0.934
Total TP 527 > 254
Total TN 449817 < 450221
Total FP 242 > 56
Total FP CONTRA 57 > 6
Total FP INCONS 92 > 12
Total FP COMP 93 > 38
Total FN 185 < 458
P-value 2.18141491686e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of ContextFold and Carnac(seed). 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 ContextFold and Carnac(seed)).

  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 ContextFold and Carnac(seed)).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for ContextFold and Carnac(seed). 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 ContextFold and Carnac(seed)).

^top





Performance of ContextFold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for ContextFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 527
Total TN 449817
Total FP 242
Total FP CONTRA 57
Total FP INCONS 92
Total FP COMP 93
Total FN 185
Total Scores
MCC 0.759
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.583 ± 0.154
Sensitivity 0.740
Positive Predictive Value 0.780
Nr of predictions 14

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.58 0.56 0.63 10 512 6 0 6 0 8
3J20_2 0.89 0.88 0.89 362 421963 88 15 28 45 50
3J3E_8 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 2722 29 12 8 9 15
3J3F_8 0.36 0.42 0.31 8 4735 32 9 9 14 11
3W1K_J 0.90 0.87 0.93 27 1649 2 1 1 0 4
3W3S_B 0.87 0.85 0.90 28 1958 4 0 3 1 5
3ZEX_C 0.44 0.41 0.48 12 5349 23 4 9 10 17
4A1C_2 0.26 0.25 0.28 5 4498 26 3 10 13 15
4AOB_A 0.62 0.59 0.68 17 1412 9 2 6 1 12
4ENB_A 0.77 0.60 1.00 9 463 0 0 0 0 6
4ENC_A 0.73 0.60 0.90 9 486 1 1 0 0 6
4FRG_B 0.77 0.71 0.85 17 1182 3 2 1 0 7
4FRN_A 0.42 0.39 0.46 11 1824 13 6 7 0 17
4JF2_A 0.57 0.50 0.67 12 1064 6 2 4 0 12

^top



Performance of Carnac(seed) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 254
Total TN 450221
Total FP 56
Total FP CONTRA 6
Total FP INCONS 12
Total FP COMP 38
Total FN 458
Total Scores
MCC 0.577
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.148 ± 0.177
Sensitivity 0.357
Positive Predictive Value 0.934
Nr of predictions 14

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.47 0.22 1.00 4 524 0 0 0 0 14
3J20_2 0.72 0.56 0.93 231 422119 56 6 12 38 181
3J3E_8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2742 0 0 0 0 15
3J3F_8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 4761 0 0 0 0 19
3W1K_J 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1678 0 0 0 0 31
3W3S_B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1989 0 0 0 0 33
3ZEX_C 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 5374 0 0 0 0 29
4A1C_2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 4516 0 0 0 0 20
4AOB_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1437 0 0 0 0 29
4ENB_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 472 0 0 0 0 15
4ENC_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 496 0 0 0 0 15
4FRG_B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1202 0 0 0 0 24
4FRN_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1848 0 0 0 0 28
4JF2_A 0.89 0.79 1.00 19 1063 0 0 0 0 5

^top


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