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 IPknot - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric IPknot Contrafold
MCC 0.600 > 0.546
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.598 ± 0.114 > 0.583 ± 0.117
Sensitivity 0.560 > 0.555
Positive Predictive Value 0.644 > 0.539
Total TP 683 > 677
Total TN 878444 > 878248
Total FP 498 < 735
Total FP CONTRA 90 < 143
Total FP INCONS 287 < 436
Total FP COMP 121 < 156
Total FN 537 < 543
P-value 5.23657817852e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of IPknot and Contrafold. 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 IPknot and Contrafold).

  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 IPknot and Contrafold).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for IPknot and Contrafold. 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 IPknot and Contrafold).

^top





Performance of IPknot - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for IPknot

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 683
Total TN 878444
Total FP 498
Total FP CONTRA 90
Total FP INCONS 287
Total FP COMP 121
Total FN 537
Total Scores
MCC 0.600
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.598 ± 0.114
Sensitivity 0.560
Positive Predictive Value 0.644
Nr of predictions 24

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.41 0.33 0.55 6 517 5 1 4 0 12
2M58_A - 0.71 0.58 0.88 7 536 1 1 0 0 5
3J0L_a - 0.16 0.18 0.18 2 400 10 3 6 1 9
3J20_2 0.75 0.74 0.76 305 421966 159 17 80 62 107
3J20_0 0.54 0.57 0.52 12 1196 12 3 8 1 9
3J3D_C 0.52 0.53 0.53 10 949 9 3 6 0 9
3J3E_8 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 2723 25 5 14 6 15
3J3F_8 0.36 0.47 0.28 9 4729 40 11 12 17 10
3RKF_A 0.91 0.83 1.00 20 846 0 0 0 0 4
3SD1_A 0.74 0.69 0.80 20 1508 5 0 5 0 9
3U4M_B - 0.91 0.91 0.91 20 1254 3 2 0 1 2
3W1K_J 0.97 0.97 0.97 30 1647 1 1 0 0 1
3W3S_B 0.94 0.91 0.97 30 1958 2 0 1 1 3
3ZEX_B - 0.33 0.27 0.40 95 421115 160 26 116 18 251
3ZEX_C 0.51 0.34 0.77 10 5361 7 1 2 4 19
4A1C_2 0.23 0.25 0.22 5 4493 26 8 10 8 15
4AOB_A 0.50 0.48 0.54 14 1411 13 3 9 1 15
4ATO_G - 0.49 0.57 0.44 4 211 6 0 5 1 3
4ENB_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 461 0 0 0 0 4
4ENC_A 0.59 0.53 0.67 8 484 4 0 4 0 7
4FRG_B 0.75 0.71 0.81 17 1181 4 3 1 0 7
4FRN_A 0.79 0.71 0.87 20 1825 3 1 2 0 8
4JF2_A 0.96 0.96 0.96 23 1058 1 1 0 0 1
4JRC_A - 0.45 0.29 0.71 5 615 2 0 2 0 12

^top



Performance of Contrafold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Contrafold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 677
Total TN 878248
Total FP 735
Total FP CONTRA 143
Total FP INCONS 436
Total FP COMP 156
Total FN 543
Total Scores
MCC 0.546
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.583 ± 0.117
Sensitivity 0.555
Positive Predictive Value 0.539
Nr of predictions 24

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.46 0.39 0.58 7 516 5 3 2 0 11
2M58_A - -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 531 13 0 13 0 12
3J0L_a - 0.53 0.55 0.55 6 400 6 3 2 1 5
3J20_2 0.70 0.72 0.69 296 421939 197 27 106 64 116
3J20_0 0.53 0.57 0.50 12 1195 13 3 9 1 9
3J3D_C 0.71 0.79 0.65 15 945 8 3 5 0 4
3J3E_8 0.12 0.13 0.11 2 2724 32 5 11 16 13
3J3F_8 0.35 0.47 0.26 9 4726 44 13 13 18 10
3RKF_A 0.87 0.83 0.91 20 844 2 2 0 0 4
3SD1_A 0.68 0.69 0.69 20 1504 9 5 4 0 9
3U4M_B - 0.81 0.77 0.85 17 1256 5 0 3 2 5
3W1K_J 0.97 0.97 0.97 30 1647 1 1 0 0 1
3W3S_B 0.98 0.97 1.00 32 1957 1 0 0 1 1
3ZEX_B - 0.26 0.27 0.25 92 420991 302 58 211 33 254
3ZEX_C 0.35 0.34 0.37 10 5347 23 4 13 6 19
4A1C_2 0.21 0.25 0.19 5 4489 33 9 13 11 15
4AOB_A 0.53 0.52 0.56 15 1410 13 3 9 1 14
4ATO_G - 0.52 0.57 0.50 4 212 4 0 4 0 3
4ENB_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 461 1 0 0 1 4
4ENC_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 485 1 0 0 1 4
4FRG_B 0.73 0.71 0.77 17 1180 5 3 2 0 7
4FRN_A 0.74 0.71 0.77 20 1822 6 1 5 0 8
4JF2_A 0.89 0.79 1.00 19 1063 0 0 0 0 5
4JRC_A - 0.38 0.41 0.39 7 604 11 0 11 0 10

^top


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