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 RDfolder - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric Sfold RDfolder
MCC 0.665 > 0.569
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.632 ± 0.113 > 0.577 ± 0.138
Sensitivity 0.629 > 0.510
Positive Predictive Value 0.717 > 0.653
Total TP 321 > 260
Total TN 22858 < 22908
Total FP 135 < 141
Total FP CONTRA 29 > 28
Total FP INCONS 98 < 110
Total FP COMP 8 > 3
Total FN 189 < 250
P-value 5.19332990918e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

  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 RDfolder).

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

^top





Performance of Sfold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Sfold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 321
Total TN 22858
Total FP 135
Total FP CONTRA 29
Total FP INCONS 98
Total FP COMP 8
Total FN 189
Total Scores
MCC 0.665
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.632 ± 0.113
Sensitivity 0.629
Positive Predictive Value 0.717
Nr of predictions 25

^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
2RP0_A - 0.84 0.71 1.00 5 111 0 0 0 0 2
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
3GX2_A 0.86 0.79 0.96 22 1426 2 1 0 1 6
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
3J0L_a - 0.55 0.64 0.50 7 397 8 5 2 1 4
3J20_0 0.51 0.57 0.48 12 1194 14 3 10 1 9
3J3D_C 0.44 0.37 0.54 7 955 6 1 5 0 12
3JYV_7 -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 1095 16 2 14 0 20
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
3RKF_A 0.91 0.83 1.00 20 846 0 0 0 0 4
3SD1_A 0.78 0.72 0.84 21 1508 4 2 2 0 8
3W3S_B 0.63 0.64 0.64 21 1956 13 4 8 1 12
4AOB_A 0.60 0.59 0.63 17 1410 11 4 6 1 12
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
4ENC_A 0.57 0.33 1.00 5 491 0 0 0 0 10
4JRC_A - 0.34 0.35 0.35 6 605 11 0 11 0 11

^top



Performance of RDfolder - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RDfolder

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 260
Total TN 22908
Total FP 141
Total FP CONTRA 28
Total FP INCONS 110
Total FP COMP 3
Total FN 250
Total Scores
MCC 0.569
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.577 ± 0.138
Sensitivity 0.510
Positive Predictive Value 0.653
Nr of predictions 25

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KFC_A - 0.79 0.63 1.00 5 231 0 0 0 0 3
2LC8_A -0.03 0.00 0.00 0 514 14 3 11 0 18
2RP0_A - 0.84 0.71 1.00 5 111 0 0 0 0 2
2ZZN_D 0.93 0.95 0.91 21 961 2 2 0 0 1
3A2K_C 0.98 0.95 1.00 21 1087 0 0 0 0 1
3A3A_A 0.59 0.50 0.71 15 1479 6 0 6 0 15
3ADB_C - 0.48 0.45 0.54 15 1791 13 1 12 0 18
3GCA_A - 0.84 0.71 1.00 5 153 0 0 0 0 2
3GX2_A 0.60 0.57 0.64 16 1424 10 2 7 1 12
3IVN_B 0.91 0.83 1.00 19 884 0 0 0 0 4
3IWN_A -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1462 10 1 9 0 28
3J0L_a - -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 407 4 3 1 0 11
3J20_0 0.82 0.76 0.89 16 1201 3 1 1 1 5
3J3D_C 0.76 0.79 0.75 15 948 5 3 2 0 4
3JYV_7 -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 1091 20 4 16 0 20
3LA5_A 0.91 0.84 1.00 21 933 0 0 0 0 4
3NKB_B - 0.43 0.42 0.47 8 718 9 2 7 0 11
3RKF_A 0.91 0.83 1.00 20 846 0 0 0 0 4
3SD1_A 0.35 0.24 0.54 7 1520 6 1 5 0 22
3W3S_B 0.29 0.27 0.33 9 1962 18 2 16 0 24
4AOB_A 0.42 0.38 0.48 11 1414 13 3 9 1 18
4ATO_G - 0.75 0.57 1.00 4 216 0 0 0 0 3
4ENB_A 0.48 0.40 0.60 6 462 4 0 4 0 9
4ENC_A 0.48 0.40 0.60 6 486 4 0 4 0 9
4JRC_A - 0.94 0.88 1.00 15 607 0 0 0 0 2

^top


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