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 ProbKnot - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric ContextFold ProbKnot
MCC 0.596 > 0.498
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.581 ± 0.145 > 0.476 ± 0.129
Sensitivity 0.588 > 0.520
Positive Predictive Value 0.604 > 0.477
Total TP 686 > 607
Total TN 875970 > 875833
Total FP 562 < 828
Total FP CONTRA 127 < 189
Total FP INCONS 322 < 476
Total FP COMP 113 < 163
Total FN 481 < 560
P-value 5.59469103578e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of ContextFold and ProbKnot. 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 ProbKnot).

  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 ProbKnot).

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

^top





Performance of ContextFold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for ContextFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 686
Total TN 875970
Total FP 562
Total FP CONTRA 127
Total FP INCONS 322
Total FP COMP 113
Total FN 481
Total Scores
MCC 0.596
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.581 ± 0.145
Sensitivity 0.588
Positive Predictive Value 0.604
Nr of predictions 22

^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
2M58_A - -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 530 14 3 11 0 12
3J0L_a - 0.80 0.73 0.89 8 402 2 0 1 1 3
3J20_0 0.95 0.95 0.95 20 1198 2 1 0 1 1
3J20_2 0.89 0.88 0.89 362 421963 88 15 28 45 50
3J3D_C 0.79 0.79 0.79 15 949 4 3 1 0 4
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
3U4M_B - 0.98 0.95 1.00 21 1255 0 0 0 0 1
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_B - 0.23 0.23 0.23 81 420993 296 62 216 18 265
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
4ATO_G - -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 218 2 1 1 0 7
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
4JRC_A - 0.91 0.82 1.00 14 608 0 0 0 0 3

^top



Performance of ProbKnot - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for ProbKnot

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 607
Total TN 875833
Total FP 828
Total FP CONTRA 189
Total FP INCONS 476
Total FP COMP 163
Total FN 560
Total Scores
MCC 0.498
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.476 ± 0.129
Sensitivity 0.520
Positive Predictive Value 0.477
Nr of predictions 22

^top



2. Individual counts for ProbKnot [ 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 - -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 529 15 0 15 0 12
3J0L_a - 0.60 0.64 0.58 7 399 6 4 1 1 4
3J20_0 0.54 0.57 0.52 12 1196 12 3 8 1 9
3J20_2 0.61 0.61 0.60 253 421947 227 32 136 59 159
3J3D_C 0.46 0.53 0.42 10 944 14 6 8 0 9
3J3E_8 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 2718 37 6 18 13 15
3J3F_8 0.39 0.47 0.33 9 4734 38 9 9 20 10
3U4M_B - 0.58 0.59 0.59 13 1254 9 2 7 0 9
3W1K_J 0.97 0.97 0.97 30 1647 1 1 0 0 1
3W3S_B 0.98 0.97 1.00 32 1957 1 0 0 1 1
3ZEX_B - 0.35 0.38 0.33 133 420946 320 82 191 47 213
3ZEX_C 0.48 0.52 0.45 15 5341 22 4 14 4 14
4A1C_2 0.17 0.25 0.13 5 4477 49 13 21 15 15
4AOB_A 0.60 0.59 0.63 17 1410 11 4 6 1 12
4ATO_G - 0.38 0.43 0.38 3 212 5 5 0 0 4
4ENB_A 0.81 0.73 0.92 11 460 1 1 0 0 4
4ENC_A 0.52 0.53 0.53 8 481 8 0 7 1 7
4FRG_B 0.38 0.38 0.41 9 1180 13 6 7 0 15
4FRN_A 0.49 0.46 0.54 13 1824 11 6 5 0 15
4JF2_A 0.91 0.92 0.92 22 1058 2 2 0 0 2
4JRC_A - 0.28 0.29 0.31 5 606 11 0 11 0 12

^top


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