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 RNAwolf - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric Cylofold RNAwolf
MCC 0.639 > 0.468
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.654 ± 0.157 > 0.429 ± 0.152
Sensitivity 0.615 > 0.455
Positive Predictive Value 0.678 > 0.502
Total TP 177 > 131
Total TN 13780 = 13780
Total FP 88 < 137
Total FP CONTRA 27 > 21
Total FP INCONS 57 < 109
Total FP COMP 4 < 7
Total FN 111 < 157
P-value 2.20167918023e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

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

^top





Performance of Cylofold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Cylofold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 177
Total TN 13780
Total FP 88
Total FP CONTRA 27
Total FP INCONS 57
Total FP COMP 4
Total FN 111
Total Scores
MCC 0.639
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.654 ± 0.157
Sensitivity 0.615
Positive Predictive Value 0.678
Nr of predictions 14

^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
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
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 RNAwolf - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNAwolf

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 131
Total TN 13780
Total FP 137
Total FP CONTRA 21
Total FP INCONS 109
Total FP COMP 7
Total FN 157
Total Scores
MCC 0.468
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.429 ± 0.152
Sensitivity 0.455
Positive Predictive Value 0.502
Nr of predictions 14

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.52 0.50 0.56 9 512 7 0 7 0 9
2M58_A - 0.60 0.58 0.64 7 533 4 1 3 0 5
3J0L_a - 0.14 0.18 0.14 2 397 13 4 8 1 9
3J20_0 0.54 0.57 0.52 12 1196 12 2 9 1 9
3RKF_A 0.89 0.83 0.95 20 845 1 0 1 0 4
3SD1_A 0.58 0.59 0.59 17 1504 12 2 10 0 12
3U4M_B - 0.50 0.50 0.52 11 1255 12 1 9 2 11
3W3S_B 0.70 0.70 0.72 23 1957 10 0 9 1 10
4AOB_A 0.26 0.24 0.30 7 1414 17 2 14 1 22
4ATO_G - -0.03 0.00 0.00 0 213 7 4 3 0 7
4ENB_A 0.45 0.40 0.55 6 461 5 1 4 0 9
4ENC_A 0.34 0.33 0.38 5 483 9 0 8 1 10
4FRG_B 0.54 0.50 0.60 12 1182 8 3 5 0 12
4FRN_A -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1828 20 1 19 0 28

^top


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