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 RNAalifold(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

  5. Compile and download dataset for RNAalifold(seed) & UNAFold [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric RNAalifold(seed) UNAFold
MCC 0.728 > 0.583
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.632 ± 0.097 > 0.597 ± 0.124
Sensitivity 0.607 > 0.606
Positive Predictive Value 0.872 > 0.562
Total TP 684 > 682
Total TN 516772 > 516343
Total FP 175 < 692
Total FP CONTRA 38 < 156
Total FP INCONS 62 < 375
Total FP COMP 75 < 161
Total FN 442 < 444
P-value 5.10776592382e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of RNAalifold(seed) and UNAFold. 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 RNAalifold(seed) and UNAFold).

  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 RNAalifold(seed) and UNAFold).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for RNAalifold(seed) and UNAFold. 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 RNAalifold(seed) and UNAFold).

^top





Performance of RNAalifold(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNAalifold(seed)

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 684
Total TN 516772
Total FP 175
Total FP CONTRA 38
Total FP INCONS 62
Total FP COMP 75
Total FN 442
Total Scores
MCC 0.728
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.632 ± 0.097
Sensitivity 0.607
Positive Predictive Value 0.872
Nr of predictions 25

^top



2. Individual counts for RNAalifold(seed) [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A -0.03 0.00 0.00 0 516 12 0 12 0 18
3A3A_A 0.79 0.63 1.00 19 1481 0 0 0 0 11
3GX2_A 0.88 0.79 1.00 22 1427 1 0 0 1 6
3IVN_B 0.71 0.65 0.79 15 884 4 2 2 0 8
3IYQ_A 0.36 0.27 0.48 14 22411 19 13 2 4 37
3IZ4_A 0.46 0.26 0.81 25 25505 8 6 0 2 70
3J20_2 0.85 0.83 0.87 343 421974 104 11 40 53 69
3J3E_8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2742 0 0 0 0 15
3J3F_8 0.61 0.37 1.00 7 4754 2 0 0 2 12
3LA5_A 0.73 0.64 0.84 16 935 3 1 2 0 9
3NPB_A 0.77 0.59 1.00 22 2256 3 0 0 3 15
3O58_3 0.60 0.36 1.00 8 4756 1 0 0 1 14
3PDR_A 0.81 0.66 1.00 33 4807 1 0 0 1 17
3RKF_A 0.74 0.67 0.84 16 847 3 1 2 0 8
3SD1_A 0.70 0.59 0.85 17 1513 3 2 1 0 12
3W1K_J 0.78 0.61 1.00 19 1659 0 0 0 0 12
3W3S_B 0.71 0.52 1.00 17 1972 2 0 0 2 16
3ZEX_C 0.49 0.24 1.00 7 5367 2 0 0 2 22
4A1C_2 0.50 0.25 1.00 5 4511 2 0 0 2 15
4AOB_A 0.85 0.72 1.00 21 1416 2 0 0 2 8
4ENB_A 0.63 0.40 1.00 6 466 0 0 0 0 9
4ENC_A 0.63 0.40 1.00 6 490 0 0 0 0 9
4FRG_B 0.84 0.71 1.00 17 1185 0 0 0 0 7
4FRN_A 0.78 0.68 0.90 19 1827 2 1 1 0 9
4JF2_A 0.61 0.42 0.91 10 1071 1 1 0 0 14

^top



Performance of UNAFold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for UNAFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 682
Total TN 516343
Total FP 692
Total FP CONTRA 156
Total FP INCONS 375
Total FP COMP 161
Total FN 444
Total Scores
MCC 0.583
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.597 ± 0.124
Sensitivity 0.606
Positive Predictive Value 0.562
Nr of predictions 25

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A -0.03 0.00 0.00 0 513 15 3 12 0 18
3A3A_A 0.97 0.93 1.00 28 1472 0 0 0 0 2
3GX2_A 0.81 0.79 0.85 22 1423 5 2 2 1 6
3IVN_B 0.91 0.83 1.00 19 884 0 0 0 0 4
3IYQ_A 0.23 0.33 0.17 17 22339 96 46 38 12 34
3IZ4_A 0.58 0.60 0.57 57 25436 53 12 31 10 38
3J20_2 0.57 0.58 0.55 240 421931 250 36 161 53 172
3J3E_8 0.15 0.20 0.13 3 2718 32 6 15 11 12
3J3F_8 0.32 0.42 0.25 8 4729 44 12 12 20 11
3LA5_A 0.91 0.84 1.00 21 933 0 0 0 0 4
3NPB_A 0.85 0.78 0.94 29 2247 6 0 2 4 8
3O58_3 0.42 0.50 0.35 11 4733 34 5 15 14 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 0.77 0.76 0.79 22 1505 6 4 2 0 7
3W1K_J 0.97 0.97 0.97 30 1647 1 1 0 0 1
3W3S_B 0.61 0.61 0.63 20 1957 13 4 8 1 13
3ZEX_C 0.30 0.34 0.26 10 5336 43 5 23 15 19
4A1C_2 0.19 0.25 0.15 5 4483 42 11 17 14 15
4AOB_A 0.60 0.59 0.63 17 1410 11 4 6 1 12
4ENB_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 461 2 0 0 2 4
4ENC_A 0.37 0.33 0.45 5 485 7 0 6 1 10
4FRG_B 0.36 0.38 0.38 9 1178 15 2 13 0 15
4FRN_A 0.48 0.46 0.52 13 1823 12 2 10 0 15
4JF2_A 0.89 0.79 1.00 19 1063 0 0 0 0 5

^top


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