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 MCFold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric TurboFold(20) MCFold
MCC 0.633 > 0.409
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.645 ± 0.171 > 0.433 ± 0.173
Sensitivity 0.635 > 0.470
Positive Predictive Value 0.638 > 0.367
Total TP 146 > 108
Total TN 23920 > 23855
Total FP 126 < 236
Total FP CONTRA 30 < 57
Total FP INCONS 53 < 129
Total FP COMP 43 < 50
Total FN 84 < 122
P-value 8.79651608537e-09

^top




Performance plots


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

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

^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 146
Total TN 23920
Total FP 126
Total FP CONTRA 30
Total FP INCONS 53
Total FP COMP 43
Total FN 84
Total Scores
MCC 0.633
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.645 ± 0.171
Sensitivity 0.635
Positive Predictive Value 0.638
Nr of predictions 11

^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
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 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.