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 CRWrnafold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric CRWrnafold NanoFolder
MCC 0.492 > 0.366
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.482 ± 0.246 > 0.394 ± 0.166
Sensitivity 0.431 > 0.380
Positive Predictive Value 0.570 > 0.362
Total TP 118 > 104
Total TN 37991 > 37911
Total FP 101 < 193
Total FP CONTRA 11 < 27
Total FP INCONS 78 < 156
Total FP COMP 12 > 10
Total FN 156 < 170
P-value 0.0

^top




Performance plots


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

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

^top





Performance of CRWrnafold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for CRWrnafold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 118
Total TN 37991
Total FP 101
Total FP CONTRA 11
Total FP INCONS 78
Total FP COMP 12
Total FN 156
Total Scores
MCC 0.492
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.482 ± 0.246
Sensitivity 0.431
Positive Predictive Value 0.570
Nr of predictions 8

^top



2. Individual counts for CRWrnafold [ 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 1525 15 2 13 0 20
2LKR_A - 0.52 0.44 0.63 17 6078 12 2 8 2 22
3J16_L 0.84 0.70 1.00 21 2754 0 0 0 0 9
3U4M_B - 0.38 0.32 0.46 12 3134 14 0 14 0 25
4A1C_3 0.70 0.59 0.84 32 7102 6 0 6 0 22
4A1C_2 0.13 0.15 0.13 5 11741 44 4 31 9 28
4AOB_A 0.59 0.48 0.74 20 4344 8 2 5 1 22
4ENC_A 0.70 0.58 0.85 11 1313 2 1 1 0 8

^top



Performance of NanoFolder - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for NanoFolder

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 104
Total TN 37911
Total FP 193
Total FP CONTRA 27
Total FP INCONS 156
Total FP COMP 10
Total FN 170
Total Scores
MCC 0.366
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.394 ± 0.166
Sensitivity 0.380
Positive Predictive Value 0.362
Nr of predictions 8

^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
3J16_L 0.36 0.37 0.37 11 2745 19 3 16 0 19
3U4M_B - 0.61 0.57 0.66 21 3128 11 1 10 0 16
4A1C_3 0.48 0.46 0.51 25 7091 24 2 22 0 29
4A1C_2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 11728 61 12 41 8 33
4AOB_A 0.33 0.29 0.39 12 4340 20 1 18 1 30
4ENC_A 0.57 0.58 0.58 11 1307 9 0 8 1 8

^top


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