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 Fold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

  4. Performance of Vsfold4 - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

  5. Compile and download dataset for Fold & Vsfold4 [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric Fold Vsfold4
MCC 0.530 > 0.507
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.480 ± 0.121 < 0.509 ± 0.115
Sensitivity 0.563 > 0.513
Positive Predictive Value 0.506 < 0.508
Total TP 396 > 361
Total TN 90537 < 90610
Total FP 489 > 425
Total FP CONTRA 136 > 121
Total FP INCONS 251 > 228
Total FP COMP 102 > 76
Total FN 308 < 343
P-value 5.92687381315e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of Fold and Vsfold4. 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 Fold and Vsfold4).

  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 Fold and Vsfold4).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for Fold and Vsfold4. 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 Fold and Vsfold4).

^top





Performance of Fold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Fold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 396
Total TN 90537
Total FP 489
Total FP CONTRA 136
Total FP INCONS 251
Total FP COMP 102
Total FN 308
Total Scores
MCC 0.530
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.480 ± 0.121
Sensitivity 0.563
Positive Predictive Value 0.506
Nr of predictions 27

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KRL_A - 0.91 0.87 0.95 20 2003 9 1 0 8 3
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
3ADB_C - 0.86 0.85 0.88 28 1787 4 0 4 0 5
3IYQ_A 0.24 0.33 0.18 17 22345 95 40 38 17 34
3IZ4_A 0.60 0.61 0.59 58 25437 47 16 25 6 37
3J0L_a - 0.15 0.18 0.17 2 399 11 4 6 1 9
3J20_0 0.54 0.57 0.52 12 1196 12 3 8 1 9
3J3D_C 0.47 0.53 0.43 10 945 13 5 8 0 9
3J3E_8 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 2719 34 5 18 11 15
3J3F_8 0.32 0.42 0.25 8 4729 41 12 12 17 11
3NKB_B - 0.41 0.42 0.42 8 716 11 4 7 0 11
3NPB_A 0.77 0.73 0.82 27 2245 11 0 6 5 10
3O58_3 0.39 0.50 0.31 11 4728 41 9 16 16 11
3PDR_A 0.93 0.92 0.94 46 4791 5 1 2 2 4
3RKF_A 0.91 0.83 1.00 20 846 0 0 0 0 4
3SD1_A 0.68 0.69 0.69 20 1504 9 4 5 0 9
3U4M_B - 0.58 0.59 0.59 13 1254 9 2 7 0 9
3W3S_B 0.94 0.91 0.97 30 1958 2 0 1 1 3
4A1C_2 0.19 0.25 0.15 5 4482 43 11 18 14 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 0.37 0.33 0.45 5 461 7 0 6 1 10
4ENC_A 0.36 0.33 0.42 5 484 8 0 7 1 10
4FRG_B 0.22 0.25 0.23 6 1176 20 7 13 0 18
4JF2_A 0.89 0.79 1.00 19 1063 0 0 0 0 5
4JRC_A - 0.34 0.35 0.35 6 605 11 0 11 0 11

^top



Performance of Vsfold4 - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Vsfold4

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 361
Total TN 90610
Total FP 425
Total FP CONTRA 121
Total FP INCONS 228
Total FP COMP 76
Total FN 343
Total Scores
MCC 0.507
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.509 ± 0.115
Sensitivity 0.513
Positive Predictive Value 0.508
Nr of predictions 27

^top



2. Individual counts for Vsfold4 [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KRL_A - 0.84 0.83 0.86 19 2002 9 2 1 6 4
2LC8_A -0.03 0.00 0.00 0 515 13 0 13 0 18
2M58_A - -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 538 6 0 6 0 12
3ADB_C - 0.95 0.91 1.00 30 1789 0 0 0 0 3
3IYQ_A 0.27 0.35 0.21 18 22353 80 40 29 11 33
3IZ4_A 0.39 0.39 0.39 37 25441 63 15 43 5 58
3J0L_a - 0.39 0.36 0.44 4 402 6 4 1 1 7
3J20_0 0.95 0.95 0.95 20 1198 2 1 0 1 1
3J3D_C 0.48 0.53 0.45 10 946 12 4 8 0 9
3J3E_8 0.10 0.13 0.09 2 2720 32 9 11 12 13
3J3F_8 0.35 0.42 0.30 8 4734 30 11 8 11 11
3NKB_B - 0.69 0.74 0.67 14 714 7 0 7 0 5
3NPB_A 0.66 0.59 0.73 22 2248 10 0 8 2 15
3O58_3 0.12 0.14 0.11 3 4737 35 8 16 11 19
3PDR_A 0.69 0.64 0.74 32 4797 13 3 8 2 18
3RKF_A 0.91 0.83 1.00 20 846 0 0 0 0 4
3SD1_A 0.23 0.24 0.24 7 1504 22 5 17 0 22
3U4M_B - 0.49 0.55 0.46 12 1250 14 3 11 0 10
3W3S_B 0.74 0.70 0.79 23 1960 7 1 5 1 10
4A1C_2 0.36 0.40 0.33 8 4492 28 4 12 12 12
4AOB_A 0.50 0.48 0.54 14 1411 13 3 9 1 15
4ATO_G - 0.38 0.43 0.38 3 212 5 5 0 0 4
4ENB_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 461 0 0 0 0 4
4ENC_A 0.77 0.60 1.00 9 487 0 0 0 0 6
4FRG_B 0.60 0.58 0.64 14 1180 8 3 5 0 10
4JF2_A 0.74 0.67 0.84 16 1063 3 0 3 0 8
4JRC_A - 0.34 0.29 0.42 5 610 7 0 7 0 12

^top


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