多变量基因选择:有帮助吗?

Carmen Lai, M. Reinders
{"title":"多变量基因选择:有帮助吗?","authors":"Carmen Lai, M. Reinders","doi":"10.1109/CSBW.2005.95","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"When building predictors of disease state based on gene expression data, gene selection is performed in order to achieve a good performance and to identify a relevant subset of genes. Although several gene selection algorithms have been proposed, a fair comparison of the available results is very problematic. This mainly stems from two factors. First, the results are often biased, since the test set is in one way or another involved in training the predictor, resulting in optimistically biased performance estimates. Second, the published results are often based on a small number of relatively simple datasets. Therefore, no general applicative conclusions can be drawn. We therefore adopted an unbiased protocol to perform a fair comparison of state of the art multivariate and univariate gene selection techniques, in combination with a range of classifiers. Our conclusions are based on seven gene expression datasets, across many cancer types. Surprisingly, we could not detect any significant improvement of multivariate feature selection techniques over univariate approaches. We speculate on the possible causes of this finding, ranging from the small sample size problem to the particular nature of the multivariate gene dependencies.","PeriodicalId":123531,"journal":{"name":"2005 IEEE Computational Systems Bioinformatics Conference - Workshops (CSBW'05)","volume":"78 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2005-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Multivariate gene selection: does it help?\",\"authors\":\"Carmen Lai, M. Reinders\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/CSBW.2005.95\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"When building predictors of disease state based on gene expression data, gene selection is performed in order to achieve a good performance and to identify a relevant subset of genes. Although several gene selection algorithms have been proposed, a fair comparison of the available results is very problematic. This mainly stems from two factors. First, the results are often biased, since the test set is in one way or another involved in training the predictor, resulting in optimistically biased performance estimates. Second, the published results are often based on a small number of relatively simple datasets. Therefore, no general applicative conclusions can be drawn. We therefore adopted an unbiased protocol to perform a fair comparison of state of the art multivariate and univariate gene selection techniques, in combination with a range of classifiers. Our conclusions are based on seven gene expression datasets, across many cancer types. Surprisingly, we could not detect any significant improvement of multivariate feature selection techniques over univariate approaches. We speculate on the possible causes of this finding, ranging from the small sample size problem to the particular nature of the multivariate gene dependencies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":123531,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2005 IEEE Computational Systems Bioinformatics Conference - Workshops (CSBW'05)\",\"volume\":\"78 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2005-08-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2005 IEEE Computational Systems Bioinformatics Conference - Workshops (CSBW'05)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/CSBW.2005.95\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2005 IEEE Computational Systems Bioinformatics Conference - Workshops (CSBW'05)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/CSBW.2005.95","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

在基于基因表达数据构建疾病状态预测因子时,进行基因选择是为了获得良好的性能并确定相关的基因子集。虽然已经提出了几种基因选择算法,但对现有结果进行公平比较是非常困难的。这主要源于两个因素。首先,结果通常是有偏差的,因为测试集以这样或那样的方式参与了预测器的训练,导致了乐观的有偏差的性能估计。其次,发表的结果通常是基于少量相对简单的数据集。因此,不能得出普遍适用的结论。因此,我们采用了一种无偏的方案,结合一系列分类器,对最先进的多变量和单变量基因选择技术进行公平比较。我们的结论是基于七个基因表达数据集,涵盖了许多癌症类型。令人惊讶的是,我们没有发现多变量特征选择技术比单变量方法有任何显著的改进。我们推测这一发现的可能原因,从小样本量问题到多变量基因依赖性的特殊性质。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Multivariate gene selection: does it help?
When building predictors of disease state based on gene expression data, gene selection is performed in order to achieve a good performance and to identify a relevant subset of genes. Although several gene selection algorithms have been proposed, a fair comparison of the available results is very problematic. This mainly stems from two factors. First, the results are often biased, since the test set is in one way or another involved in training the predictor, resulting in optimistically biased performance estimates. Second, the published results are often based on a small number of relatively simple datasets. Therefore, no general applicative conclusions can be drawn. We therefore adopted an unbiased protocol to perform a fair comparison of state of the art multivariate and univariate gene selection techniques, in combination with a range of classifiers. Our conclusions are based on seven gene expression datasets, across many cancer types. Surprisingly, we could not detect any significant improvement of multivariate feature selection techniques over univariate approaches. We speculate on the possible causes of this finding, ranging from the small sample size problem to the particular nature of the multivariate gene dependencies.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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