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 RNASLOpt - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric RNASLOpt Afold
MCC 0.393 > 0.383
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.371 ± 0.165 < 0.383 ± 0.150
Sensitivity 0.331 < 0.344
Positive Predictive Value 0.474 > 0.434
Total TP 180 < 187
Total TN 92213 > 92162
Total FP 221 < 277
Total FP CONTRA 20 < 23
Total FP INCONS 180 < 221
Total FP COMP 21 < 33
Total FN 363 > 356
P-value 5.26278708866e-06

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of RNASLOpt and Afold. 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 RNASLOpt and Afold).

  2. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for RNASLOpt and Afold. 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 RNASLOpt and Afold).

^top





Performance of RNASLOpt - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for RNASLOpt

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 180
Total TN 92213
Total FP 221
Total FP CONTRA 20
Total FP INCONS 180
Total FP COMP 21
Total FN 363
Total Scores
MCC 0.393
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.371 ± 0.165
Sensitivity 0.331
Positive Predictive Value 0.474
Nr of predictions 17

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.47 0.35 0.64 7 1529 4 0 4 0 13
2LKR_A - 0.68 0.62 0.75 24 6073 9 0 8 1 15
2M58_A - 0.32 0.24 0.44 4 1644 5 1 4 0 13
3J0L_7 - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1212 13 0 13 0 17
3J2C_O - 0.62 0.49 0.78 31 10256 10 0 9 1 32
3J3E_8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 7483 30 1 19 10 33
3U4M_B - 0.38 0.32 0.46 12 3134 14 0 14 0 25
3W3S_B 0.82 0.70 0.97 28 4724 2 0 1 1 12
3ZEX_D 0.76 0.59 0.97 29 6991 1 0 1 0 20
3ZEX_E - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 21892 55 4 49 2 77
3ZEX_H - 0.19 0.18 0.21 7 9012 26 4 22 0 31
3ZEX_F - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2628 0 0 0 0 12
4A1C_2 0.23 0.24 0.22 8 11744 35 8 21 6 25
4ATO_G - 0.30 0.30 0.33 3 519 6 2 4 0 7
4ENB_A 0.76 0.58 1.00 11 1264 0 0 0 0 8
4FNJ_A - -0.02 0.00 0.00 0 584 11 0 11 0 16
4JRC_A - 0.83 0.70 1.00 16 1524 0 0 0 0 7

^top



Performance of Afold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Afold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 187
Total TN 92162
Total FP 277
Total FP CONTRA 23
Total FP INCONS 221
Total FP COMP 33
Total FN 356
Total Scores
MCC 0.383
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.383 ± 0.150
Sensitivity 0.344
Positive Predictive Value 0.434
Nr of predictions 17

^top



2. Individual counts for Afold [ 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 6 0 5 1 9
2LKR_A - 0.93 0.87 1.00 34 6071 3 0 0 3 5
2M58_A - 0.33 0.29 0.38 5 1640 8 1 7 0 12
3J0L_7 - -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1210 15 1 14 0 17
3J2C_O - 0.58 0.49 0.69 31 10251 15 1 13 1 32
3J3E_8 0.17 0.15 0.19 5 7477 31 2 19 10 28
3U4M_B - 0.38 0.32 0.46 12 3134 14 0 14 0 25
3W3S_B 0.50 0.45 0.56 18 4721 15 1 13 1 22
3ZEX_D 0.72 0.61 0.86 30 6986 5 0 5 0 19
3ZEX_E - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 21892 55 2 51 2 77
3ZEX_H - 0.18 0.18 0.18 7 9006 33 6 26 1 31
3ZEX_F - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2617 12 2 9 1 12
4A1C_2 0.14 0.15 0.14 5 11745 43 5 26 12 28
4ATO_G - 0.32 0.30 0.38 3 520 6 1 4 1 7
4ENB_A 0.67 0.58 0.79 11 1261 3 1 2 0 8
4FNJ_A - 0.75 0.63 0.91 10 584 1 0 1 0 6
4JRC_A - 0.24 0.22 0.29 5 1523 12 0 12 0 18

^top


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