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 NanoFolder - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric Cylofold NanoFolder
MCC 0.578 > 0.477
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.638 ± 0.194 > 0.529 ± 0.194
Sensitivity 0.574 > 0.551
Positive Predictive Value 0.600 > 0.434
Total TP 78 > 75
Total TN 6360 > 6317
Total FP 54 < 105
Total FP CONTRA 12 < 27
Total FP INCONS 40 < 71
Total FP COMP 2 < 7
Total FN 58 < 61
P-value 0.0

^top



Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of Cylofold and NanoFolder. 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 NanoFolder).

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

^top




Performance of Cylofold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Cylofold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 78
Total TN 6360
Total FP 54
Total FP CONTRA 12
Total FP INCONS 40
Total FP COMP 2
Total FN 58
Total Scores
MCC 0.578
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.638 ± 0.194
Sensitivity 0.574
Positive Predictive Value 0.600
Nr of predictions 7

^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
2LC8_A

GP_knot1 links to Rfam database...

0.64 0.61 0.69 11 512 5 1 4 0 7
2M58_A - 0.60 0.58 0.64 7 533 4 1 3 0 5
3U4M_B - 0.49 0.55 0.46 12 1250 14 3 11 0 10
3W3S_B

tRNA-Sec links to Rfam database...

0.48 0.45 0.52 15 1960 15 1 13 1 18
4AOB_A

SAM links to Rfam database...

0.42 0.38 0.48 11 1414 13 3 9 1 18
4ATO_G - 0.88 1.00 0.78 7 211 2 2 0 0 0
4ENC_A

crcB links to Rfam database...

0.97 1.00 0.94 15 480 1 1 0 0 0

^top


Performance of NanoFolder - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for NanoFolder

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 75
Total TN 6317
Total FP 105
Total FP CONTRA 27
Total FP INCONS 71
Total FP COMP 7
Total FN 61
Total Scores
MCC 0.477
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.529 ± 0.194
Sensitivity 0.551
Positive Predictive Value 0.434
Nr of predictions 7

^top


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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A

GP_knot1 links to Rfam database...

0.54 0.61 0.50 11 506 11 1 10 0 7
2M58_A - 0.45 0.58 0.37 7 525 13 6 6 1 5
3U4M_B - 0.77 0.91 0.67 20 1246 12 6 4 2 2
3W3S_B

tRNA-Sec links to Rfam database...

0.18 0.21 0.18 7 1949 34 2 31 1 26
4AOB_A

SAM links to Rfam database...

0.39 0.41 0.39 12 1406 20 4 15 1 17
4ATO_G - 0.72 1.00 0.54 7 207 6 6 0 0 0
4ENC_A

crcB links to Rfam database...

0.66 0.73 0.61 11 478 9 2 5 2 4

^top

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

Copyright© - Adam Mickiewicz University & IIMCB - All rights reserved