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 Cylofold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

  4. Performance of Carnac(20) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

  5. Compile and download dataset for Cylofold & Carnac(20) [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric Cylofold Carnac(20)
MCC 0.752 > 0.643
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.773 ± 0.172 > 0.528 ± 0.247
Sensitivity 0.734 > 0.472
Positive Predictive Value 0.778 < 0.885
Total TP 168 > 108
Total TN 16613 < 16707
Total FP 62 > 19
Total FP CONTRA 19 > 4
Total FP INCONS 29 > 10
Total FP COMP 14 > 5
Total FN 61 < 121
P-value 0.0

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of Cylofold and Carnac(20). 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 Cylofold and Carnac(20)).

  2. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for Cylofold and Carnac(20). 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 Cylofold and Carnac(20)).

^top





Performance of Cylofold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Cylofold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 168
Total TN 16613
Total FP 62
Total FP CONTRA 19
Total FP INCONS 29
Total FP COMP 14
Total FN 61
Total Scores
MCC 0.752
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.773 ± 0.172
Sensitivity 0.734
Positive Predictive Value 0.778
Nr of predictions 9

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
3J20_0 0.74 0.76 0.73 16 1197 7 3 3 1 5
3O58_3 0.42 0.50 0.35 11 4733 30 9 11 10 11
3PDR_A 0.86 0.78 0.95 39 4799 4 1 1 2 11
3RKF_A 0.91 0.83 1.00 20 846 0 0 0 0 4
3SD1_A 0.71 0.69 0.74 20 1506 7 2 5 0 9
4AOB_A 0.42 0.38 0.48 11 1414 13 3 9 1 18
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 0.93 0.88 1.00 21 1181 0 0 0 0 3

^top



Performance of Carnac(20) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Carnac(20)

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 108
Total TN 16707
Total FP 19
Total FP CONTRA 4
Total FP INCONS 10
Total FP COMP 5
Total FN 121
Total Scores
MCC 0.643
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.528 ± 0.247
Sensitivity 0.472
Positive Predictive Value 0.885
Nr of predictions 9

^top



2. Individual counts for Carnac(20) [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
3J20_0 0.69 0.71 0.68 15 1197 8 1 6 1 6
3O58_3 0.60 0.36 1.00 8 4756 1 0 0 1 14
3PDR_A 0.75 0.58 0.97 29 4810 3 1 0 2 21
3RKF_A 0.91 0.83 1.00 20 846 0 0 0 0 4
3SD1_A 0.72 0.55 0.94 16 1516 1 0 1 0 13
4AOB_A 0.59 0.48 0.74 14 1418 6 2 3 1 15
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 0.50 0.25 1.00 6 1196 0 0 0 0 18

^top


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