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 RSpredict(20) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

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


Overview

Metric RSpredict(20) Fold
MCC 0.538 > 0.532
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.517 ± 0.100 > 0.517 ± 0.099
Sensitivity 0.421 < 0.473
Positive Predictive Value 0.691 > 0.602
Total TP 479 < 538
Total TN 232804 > 232604
Total FP 241 < 432
Total FP CONTRA 42 = 42
Total FP INCONS 172 < 313
Total FP COMP 27 < 77
Total FN 658 > 599
P-value 0.000322134726257

^top




Performance plots


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

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

^top





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

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

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 479
Total TN 232804
Total FP 241
Total FP CONTRA 42
Total FP INCONS 172
Total FP COMP 27
Total FN 658
Total Scores
MCC 0.538
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.517 ± 0.100
Sensitivity 0.421
Positive Predictive Value 0.691
Nr of predictions 27

^top



2. Individual counts for RSpredict(20) [ 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 0.61 0.41 0.92 11 2991 1 0 1 0 16
3IZ4_A 0.53 0.43 0.65 57 70788 35 8 23 4 75
3IZF_C 0.75 0.61 0.92 33 6867 3 1 2 0 21
3J20_0 0.80 0.67 0.95 20 2829 2 0 1 1 10
3J20_1 0.66 0.48 0.92 11 2914 1 0 1 0 12
3J2L_3 0.58 0.40 0.84 21 7850 5 0 4 1 32
3J3D_C 0.76 0.64 0.90 18 2755 2 0 2 0 10
3J3E_7 0.63 0.50 0.79 27 7106 7 1 6 0 27
3J3E_8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 7484 19 4 15 0 33
3J3F_8 0.39 0.33 0.46 12 12220 23 2 12 9 24
3J3F_7 0.79 0.68 0.92 34 7223 3 0 3 0 16
3NPB_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 7015 6 1 5 0 46
3O58_2 0.76 0.76 0.76 29 7222 10 3 6 1 9
3O58_3 0.32 0.34 0.30 12 12363 28 12 16 0 23
3PDR_A 0.67 0.49 0.92 35 12842 5 0 3 2 37
3RKF_A 0.77 0.62 0.95 21 2189 1 0 1 0 13
3SD1_A 0.68 0.60 0.78 25 3884 7 1 6 0 17
3ZEX_C 0.26 0.19 0.36 10 14168 18 2 16 0 42
3ZEX_D 0.76 0.65 0.89 32 6985 4 1 3 0 17
3ZND_W 0.34 0.22 0.56 5 2994 7 0 4 3 18
4A1C_2 0.19 0.18 0.20 6 11751 30 6 18 6 27
4A1C_3 0.48 0.33 0.69 18 7114 8 0 8 0 36
4AOB_A 0.28 0.14 0.55 6 4360 5 0 5 0 36
4ENB_A 0.48 0.32 0.75 6 1267 2 0 2 0 13
4ENC_A 0.45 0.32 0.67 6 1317 3 0 3 0 13
4FRG_B 0.17 0.09 0.33 3 3477 6 0 6 0 29

^top



Performance of Fold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Fold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 538
Total TN 232604
Total FP 432
Total FP CONTRA 42
Total FP INCONS 313
Total FP COMP 77
Total FN 599
Total Scores
MCC 0.532
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.517 ± 0.099
Sensitivity 0.473
Positive Predictive Value 0.602
Nr of predictions 27

^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_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
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_8 0.28 0.28 0.29 10 12211 39 5 20 14 26
3J3F_7 0.79 0.68 0.92 34 7223 4 0 3 1 16
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_C 0.22 0.21 0.24 11 14151 45 4 30 11 41
3ZEX_D 0.76 0.67 0.87 33 6983 5 1 4 0 16
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.