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 Murlet(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric Murlet(20) Fold
MCC 0.587 > 0.531
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.580 ± 0.077 > 0.516 ± 0.095
Sensitivity 0.435 < 0.471
Positive Predictive Value 0.797 > 0.604
Total TP 519 < 562
Total TN 239867 > 239587
Total FP 163 < 446
Total FP CONTRA 10 < 43
Total FP INCONS 122 < 326
Total FP COMP 31 < 77
Total FN 675 > 632
P-value 5.10776592382e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of Murlet(20) and Fold. 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 Murlet(20) and Fold).

  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 Murlet(20) and Fold).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for Murlet(20) and Fold. 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 Murlet(20) and Fold).

^top





Performance of Murlet(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 519
Total TN 239867
Total FP 163
Total FP CONTRA 10
Total FP INCONS 122
Total FP COMP 31
Total FN 675
Total Scores
MCC 0.587
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.580 ± 0.077
Sensitivity 0.435
Positive Predictive Value 0.797
Nr of predictions 28

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2XQD_Y 0.80 0.70 0.90 19 2829 2 0 2 0 8
3AMU_B 0.77 0.67 0.90 18 2983 3 0 2 1 9
3IZ4_A 0.40 0.24 0.65 32 70827 21 1 16 4 100
3IZF_C 0.71 0.56 0.91 30 6870 4 0 3 1 24
3J20_1 0.68 0.57 0.81 13 2910 3 0 3 0 10
3J20_0 0.58 0.47 0.74 14 2831 5 0 5 0 16
3J2L_3 0.69 0.49 0.96 26 7848 3 0 1 2 27
3J3D_C 0.78 0.64 0.95 18 2756 1 0 1 0 10
3J3E_7 0.77 0.63 0.94 34 7104 2 0 2 0 20
3J3E_8 0.24 0.15 0.38 5 7490 13 1 7 5 28
3J3F_7 0.69 0.50 0.96 25 7234 1 0 1 0 25
3J3F_8 0.48 0.36 0.65 13 12226 10 0 7 3 23
3J3V_B 0.63 0.40 1.00 23 6998 0 0 0 0 34
3NPB_A 0.55 0.35 0.89 16 7003 2 1 1 0 30
3O58_2 0.89 0.82 0.97 31 7228 2 0 1 1 7
3O58_3 0.33 0.23 0.47 8 12386 12 2 7 3 27
3PDR_A 0.70 0.53 0.93 38 12839 3 0 3 0 34
3RKF_A 0.68 0.47 1.00 16 2195 0 0 0 0 18
3SD1_A 0.68 0.57 0.83 24 3887 5 1 4 0 18
3ZEX_D 0.77 0.65 0.91 32 6986 3 0 3 0 17
3ZEX_C 0.34 0.23 0.50 12 14172 15 1 11 3 40
3ZND_W 0.45 0.39 0.53 9 2986 11 0 8 3 14
4A1C_2 0.17 0.15 0.20 5 11756 24 2 18 4 28
4A1C_3 0.59 0.41 0.85 22 7114 4 0 4 0 32
4AOB_A 0.72 0.55 0.96 23 4347 2 0 1 1 19
4ENB_A 0.46 0.21 1.00 4 1271 0 0 0 0 15
4ENC_A 0.51 0.26 1.00 5 1321 0 0 0 0 14
4FRG_B 0.17 0.13 0.25 4 3470 12 1 11 0 28

^top



Performance of Fold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Fold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 562
Total TN 239587
Total FP 446
Total FP CONTRA 43
Total FP INCONS 326
Total FP COMP 77
Total FN 632
Total Scores
MCC 0.531
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.516 ± 0.095
Sensitivity 0.471
Positive Predictive Value 0.604
Nr of predictions 28

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2XQD_Y 0.88 0.78 1.00 21 2829 0 0 0 0 6
3AMU_B 0.64 0.59 0.70 16 2980 9 0 7 2 11
3IZ4_A 0.53 0.46 0.61 61 70776 44 5 34 5 71
3IZF_C 0.70 0.59 0.82 32 6864 7 1 6 0 22
3J20_1 0.96 0.91 1.00 21 2905 0 0 0 0 2
3J20_0 0.45 0.40 0.52 12 2827 12 0 11 1 18
3J2L_3 0.62 0.53 0.74 28 7837 12 0 10 2 25
3J3D_C 0.47 0.43 0.52 12 2752 11 1 10 0 16
3J3E_7 0.46 0.37 0.57 20 7105 15 1 14 0 34
3J3E_8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 7478 34 2 23 9 33
3J3F_7 0.79 0.68 0.92 34 7223 4 0 3 1 16
3J3F_8 0.28 0.28 0.29 10 12211 39 5 20 14 26
3J3V_B 0.51 0.42 0.63 24 6983 14 1 13 0 33
3NPB_A 0.70 0.61 0.80 28 6986 10 1 6 3 18
3O58_2 0.71 0.71 0.71 27 7222 12 3 8 1 11
3O58_3 0.29 0.31 0.28 11 12363 41 3 26 12 24
3PDR_A 0.77 0.64 0.94 46 12831 5 0 3 2 26
3RKF_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2191 0 0 0 0 14
3SD1_A 0.57 0.48 0.69 20 3887 9 1 8 0 22
3ZEX_D 0.76 0.67 0.87 33 6983 5 1 4 0 16
3ZEX_C 0.22 0.21 0.24 11 14151 45 4 30 11 41
3ZND_W 0.20 0.22 0.19 5 2977 23 1 20 2 18
4A1C_2 0.14 0.15 0.14 5 11744 43 5 27 11 28
4A1C_3 0.68 0.57 0.82 31 7102 7 1 6 0 23
4AOB_A 0.50 0.40 0.63 17 4344 11 2 8 1 25
4ENB_A 0.32 0.26 0.42 5 1263 7 1 6 0 14
4ENC_A 0.31 0.26 0.38 5 1313 8 1 7 0 14
4FRG_B 0.24 0.22 0.27 7 3460 19 3 16 0 25

^top


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