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 UNAFold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

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


Overview

Metric Murlet(20) UNAFold
MCC 0.590 > 0.543
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.587 ± 0.059 > 0.546 ± 0.074
Sensitivity 0.438 < 0.475
Positive Predictive Value 0.799 > 0.626
Total TP 658 < 715
Total TN 283883 > 283565
Total FP 210 < 535
Total FP CONTRA 17 < 44
Total FP INCONS 149 < 383
Total FP COMP 44 < 108
Total FN 846 > 789
P-value 3.56938820447e-08

^top




Performance plots


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

  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 UNAFold).

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

^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 658
Total TN 283883
Total FP 210
Total FP CONTRA 17
Total FP INCONS 149
Total FP COMP 44
Total FN 846
Total Scores
MCC 0.590
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.587 ± 0.059
Sensitivity 0.438
Positive Predictive Value 0.799
Nr of predictions 38

^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
2KDQ_B 0.67 0.45 1.00 5 401 0 0 0 0 6
2WRQ_Y 0.41 0.41 0.41 7 2833 12 6 4 2 10
2XQD_Y 0.80 0.70 0.90 19 2829 2 0 2 0 8
3A2K_C 0.78 0.68 0.90 19 2905 2 0 2 0 9
3AMU_B 0.77 0.67 0.90 18 2983 3 0 2 1 9
3G4S_9 0.58 0.39 0.88 22 7356 3 1 2 0 35
3GX2_A 0.61 0.38 1.00 15 4356 1 0 0 1 25
3IVN_B 0.69 0.48 1.00 15 2331 0 0 0 0 16
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_0 0.58 0.47 0.74 14 2831 5 0 5 0 16
3J20_1 0.68 0.57 0.81 13 2910 3 0 3 0 10
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
3JYV_7 0.67 0.53 0.85 17 2830 3 0 3 0 15
3JYX_4 0.36 0.27 0.47 9 12227 15 0 10 5 24
3JYX_3 0.60 0.52 0.70 14 6308 11 0 6 5 13
3LA5_A 0.68 0.47 1.00 16 2469 0 0 0 0 18
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 UNAFold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for UNAFold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 715
Total TN 283565
Total FP 535
Total FP CONTRA 44
Total FP INCONS 383
Total FP COMP 108
Total FN 789
Total Scores
MCC 0.543
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.546 ± 0.074
Sensitivity 0.475
Positive Predictive Value 0.626
Nr of predictions 38

^top



2. Individual counts for UNAFold [ 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 0.88 0.78 1.00 21 2829 0 0 0 0 6
3A2K_C 0.42 0.39 0.46 11 2902 13 2 11 0 17
3AMU_B 0.70 0.59 0.84 16 2984 5 0 3 2 11
3G4S_9 0.50 0.39 0.67 22 7348 11 1 10 0 35
3GX2_A 0.68 0.55 0.85 22 4345 5 0 4 1 18
3IVN_B 0.78 0.61 1.00 19 2327 0 0 0 0 12
3IZ4_A 0.51 0.45 0.58 60 70772 50 4 40 6 72
3IZF_C 0.70 0.61 0.80 33 6862 8 1 7 0 21
3J20_0 0.43 0.40 0.48 12 2825 14 0 13 1 18
3J20_1 0.73 0.70 0.76 16 2905 5 0 5 0 7
3J2L_3 0.62 0.53 0.74 28 7837 12 0 10 2 25
3J3D_C 0.28 0.25 0.32 7 2753 15 1 14 0 21
3J3E_7 0.45 0.37 0.56 20 7104 16 1 15 0 34
3J3E_8 0.10 0.09 0.12 3 7477 32 2 21 9 30
3J3F_7 0.73 0.62 0.86 31 7224 6 0 5 1 19
3J3F_8 0.30 0.31 0.29 11 12208 41 4 23 14 25
3J3V_B 0.55 0.44 0.69 25 6985 11 1 10 0 32
3JYV_7 0.22 0.19 0.29 6 2829 15 0 15 0 26
3JYX_4 0.32 0.30 0.34 10 12217 31 3 16 12 23
3JYX_3 0.62 0.63 0.61 17 6300 22 1 10 11 10
3LA5_A 0.78 0.62 1.00 21 2464 0 0 0 0 13
3NPB_A 0.78 0.65 0.94 30 6989 5 0 2 3 16
3O58_2 0.71 0.71 0.71 27 7222 12 4 7 1 11
3O58_3 0.35 0.34 0.35 12 12369 33 1 21 11 23
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 0.64 0.52 0.79 22 3888 6 1 5 0 20
3ZEX_D 0.77 0.65 0.91 32 6986 3 0 3 0 17
3ZEX_C 0.24 0.21 0.28 11 14157 42 1 27 14 41
3ZND_W 0.21 0.22 0.21 5 2979 20 1 18 1 18
4A1C_2 0.14 0.15 0.14 5 11745 42 5 26 11 28
4A1C_3 0.70 0.59 0.82 32 7101 7 1 6 0 22
4AOB_A 0.50 0.40 0.63 17 4344 11 2 8 1 25
4ENB_A 0.70 0.58 0.85 11 1262 2 1 1 0 8
4ENC_A 0.32 0.26 0.42 5 1314 7 1 6 0 14
4FRG_B 0.32 0.28 0.38 9 3462 15 0 15 0 23

^top


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