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 PPfold(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

  5. Compile and download dataset for PPfold(20) & MCFold [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric PPfold(20) MCFold
MCC 0.641 > 0.409
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.622 ± 0.182 > 0.433 ± 0.173
Sensitivity 0.587 > 0.470
Positive Predictive Value 0.707 > 0.367
Total TP 135 > 108
Total TN 23958 > 23855
Total FP 75 < 236
Total FP CONTRA 14 < 57
Total FP INCONS 42 < 129
Total FP COMP 19 < 50
Total FN 95 < 122
P-value 1.61358433984e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of PPfold(20) and MCFold. 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 PPfold(20) and MCFold).

  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 PPfold(20) and MCFold).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for PPfold(20) and MCFold. 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 PPfold(20) and MCFold).

^top





Performance of PPfold(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for PPfold(20)

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 135
Total TN 23958
Total FP 75
Total FP CONTRA 14
Total FP INCONS 42
Total FP COMP 19
Total FN 95
Total Scores
MCC 0.641
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.622 ± 0.182
Sensitivity 0.587
Positive Predictive Value 0.707
Nr of predictions 11

^top



2. Individual counts for PPfold(20) [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
3J20_0 0.95 0.95 0.95 20 1198 1 1 0 0 1
3J3D_C 0.87 0.89 0.85 17 948 3 3 0 0 2
3J3E_8 0.21 0.20 0.23 3 2729 13 2 8 3 12
3J3F_8 0.37 0.37 0.37 7 4742 20 5 7 8 12
3RKF_A 0.86 0.79 0.95 19 846 1 0 1 0 5
3SD1_A 0.81 0.76 0.88 22 1508 3 2 1 0 7
3ZEX_C 0.38 0.31 0.47 9 5355 14 0 10 4 20
4A1C_2 0.27 0.25 0.29 5 4499 16 1 11 4 15
4ENB_A 0.63 0.47 0.88 7 464 1 0 1 0 8
4ENC_A 0.64 0.53 0.80 8 486 2 0 2 0 7
4FRG_B 0.84 0.75 0.95 18 1183 1 0 1 0 6

^top



Performance of MCFold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for MCFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 108
Total TN 23855
Total FP 236
Total FP CONTRA 57
Total FP INCONS 129
Total FP COMP 50
Total FN 122
Total Scores
MCC 0.409
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.433 ± 0.173
Sensitivity 0.470
Positive Predictive Value 0.367
Nr of predictions 11

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
3J20_0 0.66 0.71 0.63 15 1195 11 3 6 2 6
3J3D_C 0.54 0.63 0.48 12 943 13 4 9 0 7
3J3E_8 0.15 0.20 0.12 3 2716 36 11 12 13 12
3J3F_8 0.14 0.21 0.10 4 4720 51 17 20 14 15
3RKF_A 0.89 0.88 0.91 21 843 3 0 2 1 3
3SD1_A 0.43 0.45 0.43 13 1503 17 1 16 0 16
3ZEX_C 0.30 0.34 0.27 10 5337 28 6 21 1 19
4A1C_2 0.18 0.25 0.14 5 4480 45 12 19 14 15
4ENB_A 0.78 0.73 0.85 11 459 4 0 2 2 4
4ENC_A 0.34 0.33 0.38 5 483 11 0 8 3 10
4FRG_B 0.35 0.38 0.35 9 1176 17 3 14 0 15

^top


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