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 RNASLOpt - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric Cylofold RNASLOpt
MCC 0.603 > 0.540
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.628 ± 0.180 > 0.520 ± 0.155
Sensitivity 0.583 > 0.506
Positive Predictive Value 0.640 > 0.595
Total TP 137 > 119
Total TN 11428 < 11442
Total FP 81 < 84
Total FP CONTRA 25 < 32
Total FP INCONS 52 > 49
Total FP COMP 4 > 3
Total FN 98 < 116
P-value 1.91441904741e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

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

^top





Performance of Cylofold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Cylofold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 137
Total TN 11428
Total FP 81
Total FP CONTRA 25
Total FP INCONS 52
Total FP COMP 4
Total FN 98
Total Scores
MCC 0.603
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.628 ± 0.180
Sensitivity 0.583
Positive Predictive Value 0.640
Nr of predictions 12

^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 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
3J0L_a - 0.17 0.18 0.20 2 401 9 3 5 1 9
3J20_0 0.74 0.76 0.73 16 1197 7 3 3 1 5
3U4M_B - 0.49 0.55 0.46 12 1250 14 3 11 0 10
3W3S_B 0.48 0.45 0.52 15 1960 15 1 13 1 18
4AOB_A 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
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
4FRN_A 0.23 0.18 0.31 5 1832 11 7 4 0 23

^top



Performance of RNASLOpt - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNASLOpt

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 119
Total TN 11442
Total FP 84
Total FP CONTRA 32
Total FP INCONS 49
Total FP COMP 3
Total FN 116
Total Scores
MCC 0.540
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.520 ± 0.155
Sensitivity 0.506
Positive Predictive Value 0.595
Nr of predictions 12

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.48 0.39 0.64 7 517 4 0 4 0 11
2M58_A - 0.37 0.33 0.44 4 535 5 4 1 0 8
3J0L_a - 0.21 0.18 0.29 2 404 6 3 2 1 9
3J20_0 0.74 0.76 0.73 16 1197 7 3 3 1 5
3U4M_B - 0.49 0.55 0.46 12 1250 14 3 11 0 10
3W3S_B 0.90 0.85 0.97 28 1960 2 0 1 1 5
4AOB_A 0.31 0.28 0.38 8 1416 13 3 10 0 21
4ATO_G - 0.36 0.43 0.33 3 211 6 6 0 0 4
4ENB_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 461 0 0 0 0 4
4ENC_A 0.73 0.60 0.90 9 486 1 1 0 0 6
4FRG_B 0.60 0.58 0.64 14 1180 8 3 5 0 10
4FRN_A 0.19 0.18 0.22 5 1825 18 6 12 0 23

^top


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