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 Murlet(seed) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric ContextFold Murlet(seed)
MCC 0.574 > 0.473
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.560 ± 0.158 > 0.476 ± 0.126
Sensitivity 0.550 > 0.300
Positive Predictive Value 0.609 < 0.756
Total TP 165 > 90
Total TN 27854 < 28006
Total FP 154 > 34
Total FP CONTRA 42 > 2
Total FP INCONS 64 > 27
Total FP COMP 48 > 5
Total FN 135 < 210
P-value 2.02510705504e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

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

^top





Performance of ContextFold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for ContextFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 165
Total TN 27854
Total FP 154
Total FP CONTRA 42
Total FP INCONS 64
Total FP COMP 48
Total FN 135
Total Scores
MCC 0.574
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.560 ± 0.158
Sensitivity 0.550
Positive Predictive Value 0.609
Nr of predictions 13

^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
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 Murlet(seed) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 90
Total TN 28006
Total FP 34
Total FP CONTRA 2
Total FP INCONS 27
Total FP COMP 5
Total FN 210
Total Scores
MCC 0.473
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.476 ± 0.126
Sensitivity 0.300
Positive Predictive Value 0.756
Nr of predictions 13

^top



2. Individual counts for Murlet(seed) [ 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 0 516 12 0 12 0 18
3J3E_8 0.36 0.13 1.00 2 2740 2 0 0 2 13
3J3F_8 0.61 0.37 1.00 7 4754 0 0 0 0 12
3W1K_J 0.47 0.26 0.89 8 1669 1 0 1 0 23
3W3S_B 0.45 0.27 0.75 9 1977 3 0 3 0 24
3ZEX_C 0.49 0.24 1.00 7 5367 0 0 0 0 22
4A1C_2 0.59 0.35 1.00 7 4509 0 0 0 0 13
4AOB_A 0.69 0.48 1.00 14 1423 1 0 0 1 15
4ENB_A 0.63 0.40 1.00 6 466 0 0 0 0 9
4ENC_A 0.63 0.40 1.00 6 490 0 0 0 0 9
4FRG_B 0.17 0.13 0.25 3 1190 9 0 9 0 21
4FRN_A 0.66 0.50 0.88 14 1832 2 1 1 0 14
4JF2_A 0.47 0.29 0.78 7 1073 4 1 1 2 17

^top


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