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 RNASLOpt - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric TurboFold(20) RNASLOpt
MCC 0.596 > 0.480
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.615 ± 0.179 > 0.514 ± 0.210
Sensitivity 0.597 > 0.500
Positive Predictive Value 0.603 > 0.470
Total TP 123 > 103
Total TN 22983 > 22968
Total FP 125 < 171
Total FP CONTRA 30 < 50
Total FP INCONS 51 < 66
Total FP COMP 44 < 55
Total FN 83 < 103
P-value 9.07229227445e-09

^top




Performance plots


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

  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 RNASLOpt).

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

^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 123
Total TN 22983
Total FP 125
Total FP CONTRA 30
Total FP INCONS 51
Total FP COMP 44
Total FN 83
Total Scores
MCC 0.596
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.615 ± 0.179
Sensitivity 0.597
Positive Predictive Value 0.603
Nr of predictions 10

^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
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 RNASLOpt - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNASLOpt

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 103
Total TN 22968
Total FP 171
Total FP CONTRA 50
Total FP INCONS 66
Total FP COMP 55
Total FN 103
Total Scores
MCC 0.480
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.514 ± 0.210
Sensitivity 0.500
Positive Predictive Value 0.470
Nr of predictions 10

^top



2. Individual counts for RNASLOpt [ 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 3 3 1 5
3J3D_C 0.90 0.95 0.86 18 947 3 3 0 0 1
3J3E_8 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 2724 30 6 12 12 15
3J3F_8 0.39 0.47 0.32 9 4733 38 10 9 19 10
3ZEX_C 0.32 0.34 0.31 10 5342 36 8 14 14 19
4A1C_2 0.30 0.40 0.24 8 4482 35 13 13 9 12
4AOB_A 0.31 0.28 0.38 8 1416 13 3 10 0 21
4ENB_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 11 461 0 0 0 0 4
4ENC_A 0.73 0.60 0.90 9 486 1 1 0 0 6
4FRG_B 0.60 0.58 0.64 14 1180 8 3 5 0 10

^top


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