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 Afold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

  4. Performance of CentroidHomfold‑LAST - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

  5. Compile and download dataset for Afold & CentroidHomfold‑LAST [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric Afold CentroidHomfold‑LAST
MCC 0.424 > 0.388
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.431 ± 0.172 > 0.372 ± 0.211
Sensitivity 0.373 > 0.263
Positive Predictive Value 0.490 < 0.579
Total TP 187 > 132
Total TN 81626 < 81780
Total FP 225 > 109
Total FP CONTRA 14 > 7
Total FP INCONS 181 > 89
Total FP COMP 30 > 13
Total FN 314 < 369
P-value 7.57172654109e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of Afold and CentroidHomfold-LAST. 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 Afold and CentroidHomfold‑LAST).

  2. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for Afold and CentroidHomfold-LAST. 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 Afold and CentroidHomfold‑LAST).

^top





Performance of Afold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Afold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 187
Total TN 81626
Total FP 225
Total FP CONTRA 14
Total FP INCONS 181
Total FP COMP 30
Total FN 314
Total Scores
MCC 0.424
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.431 ± 0.172
Sensitivity 0.373
Positive Predictive Value 0.490
Nr of predictions 14

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.61 0.55 0.69 11 1524 6 0 5 1 9
2LKR_A - 0.93 0.87 1.00 34 6071 3 0 0 3 5
2M58_A - 0.33 0.29 0.38 5 1640 8 1 7 0 12
3J0L_7 - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1210 15 1 14 0 17
3J2C_O - 0.58 0.49 0.69 31 10251 15 1 13 1 32
3J3E_8 0.17 0.15 0.19 5 7477 31 2 19 10 28
3RKF_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2191 0 0 0 0 14
3U4M_B - 0.38 0.32 0.46 12 3134 14 0 14 0 25
3W3S_B 0.50 0.45 0.56 18 4721 15 1 13 1 22
3ZEX_E - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 21892 55 2 51 2 77
3ZEX_D 0.72 0.61 0.86 30 6986 5 0 5 0 19
4A1C_2 0.14 0.15 0.14 5 11745 43 5 26 12 28
4ENB_A 0.67 0.58 0.79 11 1261 3 1 2 0 8
4JRC_A - 0.24 0.22 0.29 5 1523 12 0 12 0 18

^top



Performance of CentroidHomfold‑LAST - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for CentroidHomfold‑LAST

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 132
Total TN 81780
Total FP 109
Total FP CONTRA 7
Total FP INCONS 89
Total FP COMP 13
Total FN 369
Total Scores
MCC 0.388
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.372 ± 0.211
Sensitivity 0.263
Positive Predictive Value 0.579
Nr of predictions 14

^top



2. Individual counts for CentroidHomfold‑LAST [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1529 11 0 11 0 20
2LKR_A - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 6101 4 0 4 0 39
2M58_A - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1648 5 0 5 0 17
3J0L_7 - 0.60 0.41 0.88 7 1217 1 0 1 0 10
3J2C_O - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 10296 0 0 0 0 63
3J3E_8 0.05 0.03 0.08 1 7490 16 1 11 4 32
3RKF_A 0.72 0.53 1.00 18 2193 0 0 0 0 16
3U4M_B - 0.58 0.43 0.80 16 3140 4 0 4 0 21
3W3S_B 0.85 0.73 1.00 29 4724 1 0 0 1 11
3ZEX_E - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 21914 33 1 30 2 77
3ZEX_D 0.75 0.65 0.86 32 6984 5 0 5 0 17
4A1C_2 0.16 0.15 0.18 5 11753 29 5 18 6 28
4ENB_A 0.76 0.58 1.00 11 1264 0 0 0 0 8
4JRC_A - 0.75 0.57 1.00 13 1527 0 0 0 0 10

^top


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