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 McQFold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric McQFold NanoFolder
MCC 0.575 > 0.406
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.569 ± 0.222 > 0.450 ± 0.163
Sensitivity 0.612 > 0.516
Positive Predictive Value 0.550 > 0.333
Total TP 153 > 129
Total TN 20903 > 20794
Total FP 163 < 311
Total FP CONTRA 45 < 98
Total FP INCONS 80 < 160
Total FP COMP 38 < 53
Total FN 97 < 121
P-value 2.34821445183e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

  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 McQFold and NanoFolder).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for McQFold 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 McQFold and NanoFolder).

^top





Performance of McQFold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for McQFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 153
Total TN 20903
Total FP 163
Total FP CONTRA 45
Total FP INCONS 80
Total FP COMP 38
Total FN 97
Total Scores
MCC 0.575
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.569 ± 0.222
Sensitivity 0.612
Positive Predictive Value 0.550
Nr of predictions 13

^top



2. Individual counts for McQFold [ 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 5 1 3 1 5
3J3D_C 0.90 0.95 0.86 18 947 3 3 0 0 1
3J3E_8 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 2718 36 8 16 12 15
3J3F_8 0.31 0.42 0.23 8 4726 41 12 15 14 11
3U4M_B - 0.95 0.91 1.00 20 1256 2 0 0 2 2
3W3S_B 0.49 0.45 0.54 15 1961 14 1 12 1 18
4A1C_2 0.19 0.25 0.16 5 4484 33 11 16 6 15
4AOB_A 0.50 0.48 0.54 14 1411 13 3 9 1 15
4ATO_G - -0.03 0.00 0.00 0 215 5 0 5 0 7
4ENC_A 0.97 1.00 0.94 15 480 1 1 0 0 0
4JF2_A 0.92 1.00 0.86 24 1054 5 4 0 1 0
4JRC_A - 0.97 0.94 1.00 16 606 0 0 0 0 1

^top



Performance of NanoFolder - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for NanoFolder

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 129
Total TN 20794
Total FP 311
Total FP CONTRA 98
Total FP INCONS 160
Total FP COMP 53
Total FN 121
Total Scores
MCC 0.406
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.450 ± 0.163
Sensitivity 0.516
Positive Predictive Value 0.333
Nr of predictions 13

^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 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
3J3D_C 0.76 0.95 0.62 18 939 11 9 2 0 1
3J3E_8 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 2707 47 11 24 12 15
3J3F_8 0.30 0.47 0.19 9 4714 57 21 17 19 10
3U4M_B - 0.77 0.91 0.67 20 1246 12 6 4 2 2
3W3S_B 0.18 0.21 0.18 7 1949 34 2 31 1 26
4A1C_2 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 4469 61 18 29 14 20
4AOB_A 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 0.66 0.73 0.61 11 478 9 2 5 2 4
4JF2_A 0.55 0.67 0.47 16 1048 19 9 9 1 8
4JRC_A - 0.56 0.65 0.50 11 600 11 3 8 0 6

^top


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