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 Sfold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric Sfold Afold
MCC 0.494 > 0.473
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.555 ± 0.107 > 0.521 ± 0.110
Sensitivity 0.500 < 0.516
Positive Predictive Value 0.488 > 0.434
Total TP 1516 < 1565
Total TN 5398340 > 5397841
Total FP 2004 < 2492
Total FP CONTRA 441 < 618
Total FP INCONS 1148 < 1421
Total FP COMP 415 < 453
Total FN 1517 > 1468
P-value 3.56938820447e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of Sfold and Afold. 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 Sfold and Afold).

  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 Sfold and Afold).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for Sfold and Afold. 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 Sfold and Afold).

^top





Performance of Sfold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Sfold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 1516
Total TN 5398340
Total FP 2004
Total FP CONTRA 441
Total FP INCONS 1148
Total FP COMP 415
Total FN 1517
Total Scores
MCC 0.494
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.555 ± 0.107
Sensitivity 0.500
Positive Predictive Value 0.488
Nr of predictions 30

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KFC_A - -0.03 0.00 0.00 0 229 7 1 6 0 8
2LC8_A 0.46 0.39 0.58 7 516 5 0 5 0 11
2M58_A - 0.34 0.25 0.50 3 538 3 1 2 0 9
2RP0_A - 0.84 0.71 1.00 5 111 0 0 0 0 2
2WDL_A - 0.50 0.50 0.50 392 1444543 429 62 325 42 396
2ZZN_D 0.93 0.95 0.91 21 961 3 2 0 1 1
3A2K_C 0.47 0.50 0.46 11 1084 13 3 10 0 11
3A3A_A 0.97 0.93 1.00 28 1472 0 0 0 0 2
3ADB_C - 0.67 0.64 0.72 21 1790 9 0 8 1 12
3GCA_A - 0.84 0.71 1.00 5 153 0 0 0 0 2
3IVN_B 0.91 0.83 1.00 19 884 0 0 0 0 4
3IWN_A 0.69 0.68 0.70 19 1445 9 1 7 1 9
3IYQ_A 0.25 0.33 0.19 17 22350 86 39 34 13 34
3IZ4_A 0.59 0.56 0.63 53 25452 34 14 17 3 42
3J3E_8 0.10 0.13 0.08 2 2718 32 6 16 10 13
3JYV_7 -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 1095 16 2 14 0 20
3JYX_5 - 0.42 0.46 0.38 223 1968418 588 172 189 227 258
3KIY_A - 0.53 0.51 0.56 403 1485155 373 56 266 51 383
3LA5_A 0.91 0.84 1.00 21 933 0 0 0 0 4
3NKB_B - 0.75 0.74 0.78 14 717 4 0 4 0 5
3NPB_A 0.85 0.78 0.94 29 2247 7 0 2 5 8
3O58_3 0.51 0.50 0.52 11 4743 18 2 8 8 11
3RKF_A 0.91 0.83 1.00 20 846 0 0 0 0 4
3U4M_B - 0.49 0.55 0.46 12 1250 14 3 11 0 10
3W3S_B 0.63 0.64 0.64 21 1956 13 4 8 1 12
3ZEX_B - 0.37 0.39 0.35 136 420960 296 65 191 40 210
4A1C_2 0.21 0.25 0.19 5 4489 34 8 14 12 15
4ATO_G - 0.37 0.14 1.00 1 219 0 0 0 0 6
4ENB_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 461 0 0 0 0 4
4JRC_A - 0.34 0.35 0.35 6 605 11 0 11 0 11

^top



Performance of Afold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Afold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 1565
Total TN 5397841
Total FP 2492
Total FP CONTRA 618
Total FP INCONS 1421
Total FP COMP 453
Total FN 1468
Total Scores
MCC 0.473
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.521 ± 0.110
Sensitivity 0.516
Positive Predictive Value 0.434
Nr of predictions 30

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KFC_A - -0.03 0.00 0.00 0 228 8 1 7 0 8
2LC8_A 0.64 0.61 0.69 11 512 6 0 5 1 7
2M58_A - 0.40 0.42 0.42 5 532 8 1 6 1 7
2RP0_A - 0.76 0.71 0.83 5 110 1 0 1 0 2
2WDL_A - 0.52 0.54 0.50 426 1444477 465 78 341 46 362
2ZZN_D 0.91 0.91 0.91 20 962 3 2 0 1 2
3A2K_C 0.46 0.50 0.44 11 1083 14 3 11 0 11
3A3A_A 0.93 0.87 1.00 26 1474 0 0 0 0 4
3ADB_C - 0.85 0.85 0.85 28 1786 6 0 5 1 5
3GCA_A - -0.04 0.00 0.00 0 151 9 1 6 2 7
3IVN_B 0.91 0.83 1.00 19 884 0 0 0 0 4
3IWN_A 0.67 0.68 0.68 19 1444 9 1 8 0 9
3IYQ_A 0.23 0.33 0.17 17 22339 97 47 37 13 34
3IZ4_A 0.52 0.57 0.48 54 25423 63 27 32 4 41
3J3E_8 0.26 0.33 0.21 5 2718 31 6 13 12 10
3JYV_7 -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 1088 23 4 19 0 20
3JYX_5 - 0.34 0.44 0.27 210 1968232 793 260 300 233 271
3KIY_A - 0.53 0.55 0.51 430 1485031 475 81 338 56 356
3LA5_A 0.91 0.84 1.00 21 933 0 0 0 0 4
3NKB_B - 0.69 0.74 0.67 14 714 7 0 7 0 5
3NPB_A 0.82 0.73 0.93 27 2249 6 0 2 4 10
3O58_3 0.41 0.50 0.34 11 4732 38 6 15 17 11
3RKF_A 0.91 0.83 1.00 20 846 0 0 0 0 4
3U4M_B - 0.49 0.55 0.46 12 1250 14 3 11 0 10
3W3S_B 0.55 0.55 0.56 18 1957 15 4 10 1 15
3ZEX_B - 0.34 0.38 0.31 132 420926 337 77 217 43 214
4A1C_2 0.19 0.25 0.15 5 4483 43 11 17 15 15
4ATO_G - 0.38 0.43 0.38 3 212 6 5 0 1 4
4ENB_A 0.81 0.73 0.92 11 460 3 0 1 2 4
4JRC_A - 0.27 0.29 0.29 5 605 12 0 12 0 12

^top


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