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 NanoFolder - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric Afold NanoFolder
MCC 0.380 > 0.230
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.396 ± 0.185 > 0.307 ± 0.159
Sensitivity 0.339 > 0.249
Positive Predictive Value 0.432 > 0.221
Total TP 128 > 94
Total TN 67233 > 67104
Total FP 198 < 352
Total FP CONTRA 12 < 44
Total FP INCONS 156 < 287
Total FP COMP 30 > 21
Total FN 250 < 284
P-value 1.74172190343e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of Afold 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 Afold and NanoFolder).

  2. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for Afold 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 Afold and NanoFolder).

^top





Performance of Afold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Afold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 128
Total TN 67233
Total FP 198
Total FP CONTRA 12
Total FP INCONS 156
Total FP COMP 30
Total FN 250
Total Scores
MCC 0.380
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.396 ± 0.185
Sensitivity 0.339
Positive Predictive Value 0.432
Nr of predictions 11

^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
3J3E_8 0.17 0.15 0.19 5 7477 31 2 19 10 28
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
4ATO_G - 0.32 0.30 0.38 3 520 6 1 4 1 7
4JRC_A - 0.24 0.22 0.29 5 1523 12 0 12 0 18

^top



Performance of NanoFolder - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for NanoFolder

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 94
Total TN 67104
Total FP 352
Total FP CONTRA 44
Total FP INCONS 287
Total FP COMP 21
Total FN 284
Total Scores
MCC 0.230
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.307 ± 0.159
Sensitivity 0.249
Positive Predictive Value 0.221
Nr of predictions 11

^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 0.52 0.55 0.50 11 1518 11 0 11 0 9
2LKR_A - 0.29 0.33 0.25 13 6054 38 8 30 0 26
2M58_A - 0.43 0.47 0.40 8 1633 12 4 8 0 9
3J3E_8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 7466 47 6 31 10 33
3U4M_B - 0.61 0.57 0.66 21 3128 11 1 10 0 16
3W3S_B 0.17 0.18 0.18 7 4713 34 1 32 1 33
3ZEX_E - 0.03 0.04 0.03 3 21859 85 9 74 2 74
3ZEX_D 0.26 0.27 0.27 13 6972 36 1 35 0 36
4A1C_2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 11728 61 12 41 8 33
4ATO_G - 0.61 0.70 0.54 7 515 6 2 4 0 3
4JRC_A - 0.48 0.48 0.50 11 1518 11 0 11 0 12

^top


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