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 Cylofold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

  4. Performance of CentroidAlifold(seed) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric Cylofold CentroidAlifold(seed)
MCC 0.618 > 0.593
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.635 ± 0.080 > 0.521 ± 0.098
Sensitivity 0.519 > 0.370
Positive Predictive Value 0.741 < 0.956
Total TP 430 > 306
Total TN 106330 < 106590
Total FP 172 > 21
Total FP CONTRA 19 > 2
Total FP INCONS 131 > 12
Total FP COMP 22 > 7
Total FN 398 < 522
P-value 5.02343278931e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of Cylofold and CentroidAlifold(seed). 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 Cylofold and CentroidAlifold(seed)).

  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 Cylofold and CentroidAlifold(seed)).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for Cylofold and CentroidAlifold(seed). 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 Cylofold and CentroidAlifold(seed)).

^top





Performance of Cylofold - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Cylofold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 430
Total TN 106330
Total FP 172
Total FP CONTRA 19
Total FP INCONS 131
Total FP COMP 22
Total FN 398
Total Scores
MCC 0.618
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.635 ± 0.080
Sensitivity 0.519
Positive Predictive Value 0.741
Nr of predictions 24

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KX8_A 0.94 0.89 1.00 16 845 0 0 0 0 2
2LC8_A 0.61 0.55 0.69 11 1524 5 0 5 0 9
2XQD_Y 0.81 0.78 0.84 21 2825 4 4 0 0 6
3AKZ_H 0.66 0.57 0.76 16 2680 6 0 5 1 12
3AMU_B 0.67 0.59 0.76 16 2982 7 0 5 2 11
3IZF_C 0.68 0.56 0.83 30 6867 6 0 6 0 24
3J16_L 0.75 0.57 1.00 17 2758 0 0 0 0 13
3J20_1 0.69 0.70 0.70 16 2903 7 2 5 0 7
3J20_0 0.66 0.57 0.77 17 2828 6 1 4 1 13
3J2L_3 0.56 0.43 0.72 23 7843 11 0 9 2 30
3O58_2 0.80 0.68 0.93 26 7232 3 0 2 1 12
3O58_3 0.36 0.34 0.38 12 12371 29 5 15 9 23
3PDR_A 0.72 0.54 0.95 39 12839 4 0 2 2 33
3RKF_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2191 0 0 0 0 14
3SD1_A 0.62 0.50 0.78 21 3889 6 0 6 0 21
3UZL_B 0.45 0.38 0.54 14 3544 12 1 11 0 23
3W3S_B 0.44 0.38 0.52 15 4724 15 0 14 1 25
3ZEX_D 0.58 0.49 0.69 24 6986 11 0 11 0 25
3ZND_W 0.40 0.39 0.41 9 2981 15 2 11 2 14
4AOB_A 0.35 0.26 0.48 11 4348 13 1 11 1 31
4ENB_A 0.89 0.79 1.00 15 1260 0 0 0 0 4
4ENC_A 0.86 0.79 0.94 15 1310 1 1 0 0 4
4FRG_B 0.81 0.66 1.00 21 3465 0 0 0 0 11
4FRN_A 0.20 0.14 0.31 5 5135 11 2 9 0 31

^top



Performance of CentroidAlifold(seed) - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 306
Total TN 106590
Total FP 21
Total FP CONTRA 2
Total FP INCONS 12
Total FP COMP 7
Total FN 522
Total Scores
MCC 0.593
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.521 ± 0.098
Sensitivity 0.370
Positive Predictive Value 0.956
Nr of predictions 24

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KX8_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 861 0 0 0 0 18
2LC8_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1540 0 0 0 0 20
2XQD_Y 0.47 0.22 1.00 6 2844 0 0 0 0 21
3AKZ_H 0.46 0.21 1.00 6 2695 0 0 0 0 22
3AMU_B 0.47 0.22 1.00 6 2997 0 0 0 0 21
3IZF_C 0.54 0.30 1.00 16 6887 0 0 0 0 38
3J16_L 0.45 0.20 1.00 6 2769 0 0 0 0 24
3J20_1 0.51 0.26 1.00 6 2920 0 0 0 0 17
3J20_0 0.45 0.20 1.00 6 2844 0 0 0 0 24
3J2L_3 0.53 0.28 1.00 15 7860 2 0 0 2 38
3O58_2 0.65 0.42 1.00 16 7244 0 0 0 0 22
3O58_3 0.56 0.34 0.92 12 12390 1 0 1 0 23
3PDR_A 0.77 0.61 0.98 44 12835 3 0 1 2 28
3RKF_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2191 0 0 0 0 14
3SD1_A 0.71 0.52 0.96 22 3893 1 0 1 0 20
3UZL_B 0.40 0.16 1.00 6 3564 0 0 0 0 31
3W3S_B 0.74 0.60 0.92 24 4727 3 0 2 1 16
3ZEX_D 0.60 0.37 1.00 18 7003 0 0 0 0 31
3ZND_W 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2998 6 0 5 1 23
4AOB_A 0.75 0.57 1.00 24 4347 1 0 0 1 18
4ENB_A 0.65 0.42 1.00 8 1267 0 0 0 0 11
4ENC_A 0.65 0.42 1.00 8 1318 0 0 0 0 11
4FRG_B 0.69 0.53 0.89 17 3467 2 1 1 0 15
4FRN_A 0.71 0.56 0.91 20 5129 2 1 1 0 16

^top


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