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(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric TurboFold(seed) NanoFolder
MCC 0.448 > 0.318
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.449 ± 0.303 > 0.345 ± 0.247
Sensitivity 0.464 > 0.421
Positive Predictive Value 0.442 > 0.252
Total TP 65 > 59
Total TN 15415 > 15328
Total FP 122 < 224
Total FP CONTRA 30 < 66
Total FP INCONS 52 < 109
Total FP COMP 40 < 49
Total FN 75 < 81
P-value 0.0

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of TurboFold(seed) and NanoFolder. 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(seed) and NanoFolder).

  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(seed) and NanoFolder).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for TurboFold(seed) and NanoFolder. 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(seed) and NanoFolder).

^top





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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 65
Total TN 15415
Total FP 122
Total FP CONTRA 30
Total FP INCONS 52
Total FP COMP 40
Total FN 75
Total Scores
MCC 0.448
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.449 ± 0.303
Sensitivity 0.464
Positive Predictive Value 0.442
Nr of predictions 7

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A -0.03 0.00 0.00 0 513 15 3 12 0 18
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 35 9 10 16 9
4A1C_2 0.20 0.25 0.17 5 4486 37 9 16 12 15
4AOB_A 0.67 0.59 0.77 17 1415 6 2 3 1 12
4ENC_A 0.73 0.60 0.90 9 486 1 1 0 0 6
4JF2_A 0.89 0.79 1.00 19 1063 0 0 0 0 5

^top



Performance of NanoFolder - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for NanoFolder

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 59
Total TN 15328
Total FP 224
Total FP CONTRA 66
Total FP INCONS 109
Total FP COMP 49
Total FN 81
Total Scores
MCC 0.318
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.345 ± 0.247
Sensitivity 0.421
Positive Predictive Value 0.252
Nr of predictions 7

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.54 0.61 0.50 11 506 11 1 10 0 7
3J3E_8 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 2707 47 11 24 12 15
3J3F_8 0.30 0.47 0.19 9 4714 57 21 17 19 10
4A1C_2 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 4469 61 18 29 14 20
4AOB_A 0.39 0.41 0.39 12 1406 20 4 15 1 17
4ENC_A 0.66 0.73 0.61 11 478 9 2 5 2 4
4JF2_A 0.55 0.67 0.47 16 1048 19 9 9 1 8

^top


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