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 TurboFold(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

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

  5. Compile and download dataset for TurboFold(seed) & Sfold [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric TurboFold(seed) Sfold
MCC 0.529 > 0.524
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.527 ± 0.155 < 0.535 ± 0.141
Sensitivity 0.434 > 0.423
Positive Predictive Value 0.650 < 0.655
Total TP 212 > 207
Total TN 79366 < 79376
Total FP 150 < 155
Total FP CONTRA 16 > 15
Total FP INCONS 98 > 94
Total FP COMP 36 < 46
Total FN 277 < 282
P-value 0.00422458200172

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of TurboFold(seed) and Sfold. 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 TurboFold(seed) and Sfold).

  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 TurboFold(seed) and Sfold).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for TurboFold(seed) and Sfold. 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 TurboFold(seed) and Sfold).

^top





Performance of TurboFold(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for TurboFold(seed)

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 212
Total TN 79366
Total FP 150
Total FP CONTRA 16
Total FP INCONS 98
Total FP COMP 36
Total FN 277
Total Scores
MCC 0.529
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.527 ± 0.155
Sensitivity 0.434
Positive Predictive Value 0.650
Nr of predictions 14

^top



2. Individual counts for TurboFold(seed) [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 1525 15 2 13 0 20
3J3E_8 0.17 0.15 0.21 5 7479 28 2 17 9 28
3J3F_8 0.39 0.36 0.42 13 12215 32 2 16 14 23
3RKF_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2191 0 0 0 0 14
3SD1_A 0.59 0.48 0.74 20 3889 7 1 6 0 22
3W1K_J 0.87 0.79 0.97 30 4155 1 1 0 0 8
3ZEX_C 0.39 0.27 0.56 14 14171 14 2 9 3 38
4A1C_3 0.69 0.57 0.84 31 7103 6 0 6 0 23
4A1C_2 0.15 0.15 0.15 5 11748 37 3 25 9 28
4AOB_A 0.56 0.40 0.77 17 4349 6 1 4 1 25
4ENB_A 0.69 0.47 1.00 9 1266 0 0 0 0 10
4ENC_A 0.65 0.47 0.90 9 1316 1 1 0 0 10
4FRN_A 0.69 0.56 0.87 20 5128 3 1 2 0 16
4JF2_A 0.78 0.61 1.00 19 2831 0 0 0 0 12

^top



Performance of Sfold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Sfold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 207
Total TN 79376
Total FP 155
Total FP CONTRA 15
Total FP INCONS 94
Total FP COMP 46
Total FN 282
Total Scores
MCC 0.524
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.535 ± 0.141
Sensitivity 0.423
Positive Predictive Value 0.655
Nr of predictions 14

^top



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

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2LC8_A 0.45 0.35 0.58 7 1528 5 0 5 0 13
3J3E_8 0.06 0.06 0.08 2 7477 32 2 22 8 31
3J3F_8 0.35 0.33 0.38 12 12214 34 3 17 14 24
3RKF_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2191 0 0 0 0 14
3SD1_A 0.65 0.50 0.84 21 3891 4 1 3 0 21
3W1K_J 0.87 0.79 0.97 30 4155 1 1 0 0 8
3ZEX_C 0.32 0.21 0.48 11 14173 26 1 11 14 41
4A1C_3 0.69 0.57 0.84 31 7103 6 1 5 0 23
4A1C_2 0.16 0.15 0.17 5 11751 34 2 23 9 28
4AOB_A 0.50 0.40 0.63 17 4344 11 2 8 1 25
4ENB_A 0.76 0.58 1.00 11 1264 0 0 0 0 8
4ENC_A 0.51 0.26 1.00 5 1321 0 0 0 0 14
4FRN_A 0.63 0.44 0.89 16 5133 2 2 0 0 20
4JF2_A 0.78 0.61 1.00 19 2831 0 0 0 0 12

^top


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