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 IPknot - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric IPknot Cylofold
MCC 0.578 > 0.490
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.556 ± 0.106 > 0.516 ± 0.092
Sensitivity 0.481 > 0.409
Positive Predictive Value 0.701 > 0.595
Total TP 426 > 362
Total TN 113760 = 113760
Total FP 198 < 261
Total FP CONTRA 15 < 20
Total FP INCONS 167 < 226
Total FP COMP 16 > 15
Total FN 459 < 523
P-value 3.56938820447e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of IPknot and Cylofold. 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 IPknot and Cylofold).

  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 IPknot and Cylofold).

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

^top





Performance of IPknot - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for IPknot

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 426
Total TN 113760
Total FP 198
Total FP CONTRA 15
Total FP INCONS 167
Total FP COMP 16
Total FN 459
Total Scores
MCC 0.578
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.556 ± 0.106
Sensitivity 0.481
Positive Predictive Value 0.701
Nr of predictions 28

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.40 0.30 0.55 6 1529 5 1 4 0 14
2LKR_A - 0.84 0.77 0.91 30 6072 4 0 3 1 9
2M58_A - 0.60 0.41 0.88 7 1645 1 1 0 0 10
3AMU_B 0.70 0.59 0.84 16 2984 5 0 3 2 11
3J0L_a - 0.21 0.19 0.25 3 1116 9 1 8 0 13
3J0L_2 - 0.39 0.36 0.43 12 6188 18 2 14 2 21
3J0L_g - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 461 4 1 3 0 4
3J0L_7 - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1218 7 0 7 0 17
3J16_L 0.75 0.57 1.00 17 2758 0 0 0 0 13
3J20_0 0.45 0.40 0.52 12 2827 12 0 11 1 18
3J20_1 0.96 0.91 1.00 21 2905 0 0 0 0 2
3J2C_O - 0.82 0.67 1.00 42 10254 1 0 0 1 21
3J2L_3 0.66 0.55 0.81 29 7839 9 0 7 2 24
3RKF_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2191 0 0 0 0 14
3SD1_A 0.61 0.48 0.80 20 3891 5 0 5 0 22
3U4M_B - 0.68 0.54 0.87 20 3137 3 1 2 0 17
3UZL_B 0.72 0.54 0.95 20 3549 1 0 1 0 17
3W3S_B 0.85 0.75 0.97 30 4722 2 0 1 1 10
3ZEX_E - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 21894 53 4 47 2 77
3ZEX_D 0.72 0.63 0.82 31 6983 7 0 7 0 18
3ZND_W 0.20 0.22 0.19 5 2977 23 1 20 2 18
4AOB_A 0.42 0.33 0.54 14 4345 13 1 11 1 28
4ATO_G - 0.41 0.40 0.44 4 519 6 0 5 1 6
4ENB_A 0.76 0.58 1.00 11 1264 0 0 0 0 8
4ENC_A 0.52 0.42 0.67 8 1314 4 0 4 0 11
4FNJ_A - 0.79 0.63 1.00 10 585 0 0 0 0 6
4FRG_B 0.69 0.56 0.86 18 3465 3 1 2 0 14
4FRN_A 0.69 0.56 0.87 20 5128 3 1 2 0 16

^top



Performance of Cylofold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Cylofold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 362
Total TN 113760
Total FP 261
Total FP CONTRA 20
Total FP INCONS 226
Total FP COMP 15
Total FN 523
Total Scores
MCC 0.490
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.516 ± 0.092
Sensitivity 0.409
Positive Predictive Value 0.595
Nr of predictions 28

^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
2LC8_A 0.61 0.55 0.69 11 1524 5 0 5 0 9
2LKR_A - 0.50 0.44 0.59 17 6076 12 2 10 0 22
2M58_A - 0.51 0.41 0.64 7 1642 4 1 3 0 10
3AMU_B 0.67 0.59 0.76 16 2982 7 0 5 2 11
3J0L_a - 0.22 0.19 0.27 3 1117 8 1 7 0 13
3J0L_2 - 0.39 0.36 0.43 12 6188 18 2 14 2 21
3J0L_g - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 461 4 1 3 0 4
3J0L_7 - 0.30 0.29 0.33 5 1210 10 0 10 0 12
3J16_L 0.75 0.57 1.00 17 2758 0 0 0 0 13
3J20_0 0.66 0.57 0.77 17 2828 6 1 4 1 13
3J20_1 0.69 0.70 0.70 16 2903 7 2 5 0 7
3J2C_O - 0.43 0.33 0.55 21 10258 18 0 17 1 42
3J2L_3 0.56 0.43 0.72 23 7843 11 0 9 2 30
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
3U4M_B - 0.38 0.32 0.46 12 3134 14 0 14 0 25
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_E - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 21897 51 2 46 3 77
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
4ATO_G - 0.73 0.70 0.78 7 519 2 1 1 0 3
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
4FNJ_A - 0.70 0.50 1.00 8 587 0 0 0 0 8
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


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