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 TurboFold(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric TurboFold(20) Contrafold
MCC 0.636 > 0.545
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.647 ± 0.154 > 0.565 ± 0.165
Sensitivity 0.629 > 0.568
Positive Predictive Value 0.649 > 0.533
Total TP 163 > 147
Total TN 25335 > 25310
Total FP 132 < 184
Total FP CONTRA 32 < 50
Total FP INCONS 56 < 79
Total FP COMP 44 < 55
Total FN 96 < 112
P-value 1.61358433984e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of TurboFold(20) and Contrafold. 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 TurboFold(20) and Contrafold).

  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 TurboFold(20) and Contrafold).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for TurboFold(20) and Contrafold. 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 TurboFold(20) and Contrafold).

^top





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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 163
Total TN 25335
Total FP 132
Total FP CONTRA 32
Total FP INCONS 56
Total FP COMP 44
Total FN 96
Total Scores
MCC 0.636
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.647 ± 0.154
Sensitivity 0.629
Positive Predictive Value 0.649
Nr of predictions 12

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
3J20_0 0.74 0.76 0.73 16 1197 7 1 5 1 5
3J3D_C 0.90 0.95 0.86 18 947 3 3 0 0 1
3J3E_8 0.27 0.33 0.23 5 2720 28 6 11 11 10
3J3F_8 0.42 0.53 0.34 10 4732 37 9 10 18 9
3RKF_A 0.91 0.83 1.00 20 846 0 0 0 0 4
3SD1_A 0.71 0.69 0.74 20 1506 7 2 5 0 9
3ZEX_C 0.49 0.45 0.54 13 5350 15 2 9 4 16
4A1C_2 0.22 0.25 0.21 5 4492 28 6 13 9 15
4AOB_A 0.67 0.59 0.77 17 1415 6 2 3 1 12
4ENB_A 0.77 0.60 1.00 9 463 0 0 0 0 6
4ENC_A 0.73 0.60 0.90 9 486 1 1 0 0 6
4FRG_B 0.93 0.88 1.00 21 1181 0 0 0 0 3

^top



Performance of Contrafold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Contrafold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 147
Total TN 25310
Total FP 184
Total FP CONTRA 50
Total FP INCONS 79
Total FP COMP 55
Total FN 112
Total Scores
MCC 0.545
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.565 ± 0.165
Sensitivity 0.568
Positive Predictive Value 0.533
Nr of predictions 12

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
3J20_0 0.53 0.57 0.50 12 1195 13 3 9 1 9
3J3D_C 0.71 0.79 0.65 15 945 8 3 5 0 4
3J3E_8 0.12 0.13 0.11 2 2724 32 5 11 16 13
3J3F_8 0.35 0.47 0.26 9 4726 44 13 13 18 10
3RKF_A 0.87 0.83 0.91 20 844 2 2 0 0 4
3SD1_A 0.68 0.69 0.69 20 1504 9 5 4 0 9
3ZEX_C 0.35 0.34 0.37 10 5347 23 4 13 6 19
4A1C_2 0.21 0.25 0.19 5 4489 33 9 13 11 15
4AOB_A 0.53 0.52 0.56 15 1410 13 3 9 1 14
4ENB_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 461 1 0 0 1 4
4ENC_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 485 1 0 0 1 4
4FRG_B 0.73 0.71 0.77 17 1180 5 3 2 0 7

^top


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