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 Contrafold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

  4. Performance of Mastr(20) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric Contrafold Mastr(20)
MCC 0.536 > 0.500
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.546 ± 0.080 > 0.458 ± 0.108
Sensitivity 0.472 > 0.336
Positive Predictive Value 0.613 < 0.749
Total TP 710 > 506
Total TN 283548 < 284031
Total FP 526 > 202
Total FP CONTRA 58 > 19
Total FP INCONS 391 > 151
Total FP COMP 77 > 32
Total FN 794 < 998
P-value 4.1569883686e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of Contrafold and Mastr(20). 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 Contrafold and Mastr(20)).

  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 Contrafold and Mastr(20)).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for Contrafold and Mastr(20). 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 Contrafold and Mastr(20)).

^top





Performance of Contrafold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Contrafold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 710
Total TN 283548
Total FP 526
Total FP CONTRA 58
Total FP INCONS 391
Total FP COMP 77
Total FN 794
Total Scores
MCC 0.536
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.546 ± 0.080
Sensitivity 0.472
Positive Predictive Value 0.613
Nr of predictions 38

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KDQ_B 0.95 0.91 1.00 10 396 0 0 0 0 1
2WRQ_Y 0.57 0.59 0.56 10 2832 13 5 3 5 7
2XQD_Y 0.78 0.70 0.86 19 2828 3 0 3 0 8
3A2K_C 0.44 0.43 0.46 12 2900 14 2 12 0 16
3AMU_B 0.65 0.59 0.73 16 2981 8 0 6 2 11
3G4S_9 0.30 0.25 0.38 14 7344 23 1 22 0 43
3GX2_A 0.77 0.63 0.96 25 4345 2 0 1 1 15
3IVN_B 0.78 0.61 1.00 19 2327 0 0 0 0 12
3IZ4_A 0.52 0.45 0.61 60 70777 44 4 35 5 72
3IZF_C 0.68 0.61 0.77 33 6860 10 1 9 0 21
3J20_0 0.44 0.40 0.50 12 2826 13 0 12 1 18
3J20_1 0.96 0.91 1.00 21 2905 4 0 0 4 2
3J2L_3 0.56 0.49 0.65 26 7835 16 0 14 2 27
3J3D_C 0.67 0.61 0.74 17 2752 6 0 6 0 11
3J3E_7 0.45 0.37 0.56 20 7104 16 1 15 0 34
3J3E_8 0.07 0.06 0.10 2 7483 32 1 17 14 31
3J3F_7 0.68 0.62 0.76 31 7219 11 0 10 1 19
3J3F_8 0.31 0.33 0.29 12 12205 41 4 25 12 24
3J3V_B 0.48 0.39 0.61 22 6985 14 1 13 0 35
3JYV_7 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 2830 20 0 20 0 32
3JYX_4 0.20 0.21 0.20 7 12211 35 6 22 7 26
3JYX_3 0.28 0.30 0.27 8 6298 23 8 14 1 19
3LA5_A 0.78 0.62 1.00 21 2464 0 0 0 0 13
3NPB_A 0.76 0.70 0.84 32 6983 8 1 5 2 14
3O58_2 0.78 0.76 0.81 29 7224 10 2 5 3 9
3O58_3 0.28 0.26 0.31 9 12374 20 3 17 0 26
3PDR_A 0.69 0.60 0.80 43 12826 13 0 11 2 29
3RKF_A 0.73 0.59 0.91 20 2189 2 1 1 0 14
3SD1_A 0.57 0.48 0.69 20 3887 9 2 7 0 22
3ZEX_D 0.73 0.67 0.80 33 6980 8 1 7 0 16
3ZEX_C 0.28 0.21 0.38 11 14167 22 3 15 4 41
3ZND_W 0.19 0.22 0.18 5 2975 25 1 22 2 18
4A1C_2 0.16 0.15 0.17 5 11751 33 5 20 8 28
4A1C_3 0.66 0.57 0.78 31 7100 9 1 8 0 23
4AOB_A 0.44 0.36 0.56 15 4344 13 1 11 1 27
4ENB_A 0.73 0.58 0.92 11 1263 1 1 0 0 8
4ENC_A 0.73 0.58 0.92 11 1314 1 1 0 0 8
4FRG_B 0.68 0.56 0.82 18 3464 4 1 3 0 14

^top



Performance of Mastr(20) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Mastr(20)

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 506
Total TN 284031
Total FP 202
Total FP CONTRA 19
Total FP INCONS 151
Total FP COMP 32
Total FN 998
Total Scores
MCC 0.500
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.458 ± 0.108
Sensitivity 0.336
Positive Predictive Value 0.749
Nr of predictions 38

^top



2. Individual counts for Mastr(20) [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KDQ_B 0.95 0.91 1.00 10 396 0 0 0 0 1
2WRQ_Y 0.57 0.59 0.56 10 2832 12 5 3 4 7
2XQD_Y 0.88 0.78 1.00 21 2829 0 0 0 0 6
3A2K_C 0.72 0.61 0.85 17 2906 3 0 3 0 11
3AMU_B 0.77 0.59 1.00 16 2987 1 0 0 1 11
3G4S_9 0.48 0.32 0.75 18 7357 8 1 5 2 39
3GX2_A 0.39 0.28 0.55 11 4351 10 0 9 1 29
3IVN_B 0.78 0.65 0.95 20 2325 1 1 0 0 11
3IZ4_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 70876 0 0 0 0 132
3IZF_C 0.73 0.63 0.85 34 6863 7 1 5 1 20
3J20_0 0.84 0.70 1.00 21 2829 1 0 0 1 9
3J20_1 0.25 0.22 0.29 5 2909 12 0 12 0 18
3J2L_3 0.34 0.25 0.48 13 7848 16 1 13 2 40
3J3D_C 0.82 0.71 0.95 20 2754 1 0 1 0 8
3J3E_7 0.66 0.57 0.76 31 7099 10 1 9 0 23
3J3E_8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 7503 0 0 0 0 33
3J3F_7 0.72 0.64 0.82 32 7221 8 0 7 1 18
3J3F_8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 12246 0 0 0 0 36
3J3V_B 0.19 0.12 0.30 7 6998 16 0 16 0 50
3JYV_7 0.81 0.66 1.00 21 2829 0 0 0 0 11
3JYX_4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 12246 0 0 0 0 33
3JYX_3 0.56 0.56 0.58 15 6302 23 1 10 12 12
3LA5_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2465 0 0 0 0 14
3NPB_A 0.30 0.24 0.39 11 6993 18 1 16 1 35
3O58_2 0.76 0.76 0.76 29 7222 12 3 6 3 9
3O58_3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 12403 0 0 0 0 35
3PDR_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 12880 0 0 0 0 72
3RKF_A 0.70 0.50 1.00 17 2194 0 0 0 0 17
3SD1_A 0.61 0.50 0.75 21 3888 7 1 6 0 21
3ZEX_D 0.80 0.71 0.90 35 6982 4 0 4 0 14
3ZEX_C 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 14196 0 0 0 0 52
3ZND_W -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 2988 16 3 12 1 23
4A1C_2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 11781 0 0 0 0 33
4A1C_3 0.70 0.59 0.84 32 7102 7 0 6 1 22
4AOB_A 0.39 0.26 0.58 11 4352 9 0 8 1 31
4ENB_A 0.39 0.16 1.00 3 1272 0 0 0 0 16
4ENC_A 0.51 0.26 1.00 5 1321 0 0 0 0 14
4FRG_B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 3486 0 0 0 0 32

^top


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