AUPRC: a metric for evaluating the performance of in-silico perturbation methods in identifying differentially expressed genes.

IF 7.7 2区 生物学 Q1 BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS
Hongxu Zhu, Amir Asiaee, Leila Azinfar, Jun Li, Han Liang, Ehsan Irajizad, Kim-Anh Do, James P Long
{"title":"AUPRC: a metric for evaluating the performance of in-silico perturbation methods in identifying differentially expressed genes.","authors":"Hongxu Zhu, Amir Asiaee, Leila Azinfar, Jun Li, Han Liang, Ehsan Irajizad, Kim-Anh Do, James P Long","doi":"10.1093/bib/bbaf426","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In silico perturbation models, computational methods that can predict cellular responses to perturbations, present an opportunity to reduce the need for costly and time-intensive in vitro experiments. Many recently proposed models predict high-dimensional cellular responses, such as gene or protein expression to perturbations such as gene knockout or drugs. However, evaluating in silico performance has largely relied on metrics such as $R^{2}$, which assess overall prediction accuracy but fail to capture biologically significant outcomes like the identification of differentially expressed (DE) genes. In this study, we present a novel evaluation framework that introduces the AUPRC metric to assess the precision and recall of DE gene predictions. By applying this framework to both single-cell and pseudo-bulked datasets, we systematically benchmark simple and advanced computational models. Our results highlight a significant discrepancy between $R^{2}$ and AUPRC, with models achieving high $R^{2}$ values but struggling to identify DE genes, as reflected in their low AUPRC values. This finding underscores the limitations of traditional evaluation metrics and the importance of biologically relevant assessments. Our framework provides a more comprehensive understanding of model capabilities, advancing the application of computational approaches in cellular perturbation research.</p>","PeriodicalId":9209,"journal":{"name":"Briefings in bioinformatics","volume":"26 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12400816/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Briefings in bioinformatics","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/bib/bbaf426","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In silico perturbation models, computational methods that can predict cellular responses to perturbations, present an opportunity to reduce the need for costly and time-intensive in vitro experiments. Many recently proposed models predict high-dimensional cellular responses, such as gene or protein expression to perturbations such as gene knockout or drugs. However, evaluating in silico performance has largely relied on metrics such as $R^{2}$, which assess overall prediction accuracy but fail to capture biologically significant outcomes like the identification of differentially expressed (DE) genes. In this study, we present a novel evaluation framework that introduces the AUPRC metric to assess the precision and recall of DE gene predictions. By applying this framework to both single-cell and pseudo-bulked datasets, we systematically benchmark simple and advanced computational models. Our results highlight a significant discrepancy between $R^{2}$ and AUPRC, with models achieving high $R^{2}$ values but struggling to identify DE genes, as reflected in their low AUPRC values. This finding underscores the limitations of traditional evaluation metrics and the importance of biologically relevant assessments. Our framework provides a more comprehensive understanding of model capabilities, advancing the application of computational approaches in cellular perturbation research.

AUPRC:用于评估在识别差异表达基因的硅微扰方法的性能的度量。
在硅微扰模型中,计算方法可以预测细胞对微扰的反应,提供了一个机会,以减少对昂贵和时间密集的体外实验的需求。最近提出的许多模型预测高维细胞反应,如基因或蛋白质对基因敲除或药物等扰动的表达。然而,对计算机性能的评估在很大程度上依赖于诸如$R^{2}$之类的指标,这些指标评估了总体预测的准确性,但未能捕捉到生物学上重要的结果,如鉴别差异表达(DE)基因。在这项研究中,我们提出了一个新的评估框架,引入AUPRC度量来评估DE基因预测的准确性和召回率。通过将该框架应用于单细胞和伪批量数据集,我们系统地对简单和高级计算模型进行基准测试。我们的研究结果突出了$R^{2}$和AUPRC之间的显著差异,模型获得了高$R^{2}$值,但难以识别DE基因,这反映在它们的低AUPRC值上。这一发现强调了传统评估指标的局限性和生物学相关评估的重要性。我们的框架提供了对模型能力的更全面的理解,促进了计算方法在细胞摄动研究中的应用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Briefings in bioinformatics
Briefings in bioinformatics 生物-生化研究方法
CiteScore
13.20
自引率
13.70%
发文量
549
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: Briefings in Bioinformatics is an international journal serving as a platform for researchers and educators in the life sciences. It also appeals to mathematicians, statisticians, and computer scientists applying their expertise to biological challenges. The journal focuses on reviews tailored for users of databases and analytical tools in contemporary genetics, molecular and systems biology. It stands out by offering practical assistance and guidance to non-specialists in computerized methodologies. Covering a wide range from introductory concepts to specific protocols and analyses, the papers address bacterial, plant, fungal, animal, and human data. The journal's detailed subject areas include genetic studies of phenotypes and genotypes, mapping, DNA sequencing, expression profiling, gene expression studies, microarrays, alignment methods, protein profiles and HMMs, lipids, metabolic and signaling pathways, structure determination and function prediction, phylogenetic studies, and education and training.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信