二元逻辑回归与人工神经网络预测前体序列解理的比较分析

A. Tegge, S. Rodriguez-Zas, J. Sweedler, B. Southey
{"title":"二元逻辑回归与人工神经网络预测前体序列解理的比较分析","authors":"A. Tegge, S. Rodriguez-Zas, J. Sweedler, B. Southey","doi":"10.1109/BIBMW.2007.4425407","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Bioinformatic predictions of neuropeptides resulting from enzymatic cleavages of precursors enable a range of follow-up studies that are aided by accurate predictions. A comparative study of the performance of complementary cleavage prediction models has been undertaken. Binary logistic and artificial neural network (ANN) models were created using various strategies and trained and tested on bovine and rat precursors with experimental cleavage information. Multiple criteria were used to compare 4 logistic regression models with varying properties and 8 ANN with varying structures. All models had high specificity (>90%) and sensitivity ranged from 68% to 100%. ANN based on well-represented amino acid locations performed similarly or slightly worse than networks based on all amino acid locations. Logistic parameter estimates aided in the identification of amino acids associated with cleavage. No model was superior across data sets and thus, prediction of neuropeptides should rely on multiple model specifications and comprehensive training data sets.","PeriodicalId":260286,"journal":{"name":"2007 IEEE International Conference on Bioinformatics and Biomedicine Workshops","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2007-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative analysis of binary logistic regression to artificial neural networks in predicting precursor sequence cleavage\",\"authors\":\"A. Tegge, S. Rodriguez-Zas, J. Sweedler, B. Southey\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/BIBMW.2007.4425407\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Bioinformatic predictions of neuropeptides resulting from enzymatic cleavages of precursors enable a range of follow-up studies that are aided by accurate predictions. A comparative study of the performance of complementary cleavage prediction models has been undertaken. Binary logistic and artificial neural network (ANN) models were created using various strategies and trained and tested on bovine and rat precursors with experimental cleavage information. Multiple criteria were used to compare 4 logistic regression models with varying properties and 8 ANN with varying structures. All models had high specificity (>90%) and sensitivity ranged from 68% to 100%. ANN based on well-represented amino acid locations performed similarly or slightly worse than networks based on all amino acid locations. Logistic parameter estimates aided in the identification of amino acids associated with cleavage. No model was superior across data sets and thus, prediction of neuropeptides should rely on multiple model specifications and comprehensive training data sets.\",\"PeriodicalId\":260286,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2007 IEEE International Conference on Bioinformatics and Biomedicine Workshops\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2007-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2007 IEEE International Conference on Bioinformatics and Biomedicine Workshops\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/BIBMW.2007.4425407\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2007 IEEE International Conference on Bioinformatics and Biomedicine Workshops","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/BIBMW.2007.4425407","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

对前体酶裂解产生的神经肽的生物信息学预测使一系列后续研究能够得到准确预测的帮助。对互补解理预测模型的性能进行了比较研究。采用不同的策略建立了二元逻辑模型和人工神经网络模型,并对牛和大鼠前体进行了实验切割信息的训练和测试。采用多准则对4种不同性质的逻辑回归模型和8种不同结构的人工神经网络进行比较。所有模型均具有高特异性(>90%),敏感性范围为68%至100%。基于表现良好的氨基酸位置的人工神经网络的表现与基于所有氨基酸位置的网络相似或略差。逻辑参数估计有助于鉴定与卵裂有关的氨基酸。没有模型在数据集上具有优势,因此,神经肽的预测应该依赖于多个模型规格和综合训练数据集。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparative analysis of binary logistic regression to artificial neural networks in predicting precursor sequence cleavage
Bioinformatic predictions of neuropeptides resulting from enzymatic cleavages of precursors enable a range of follow-up studies that are aided by accurate predictions. A comparative study of the performance of complementary cleavage prediction models has been undertaken. Binary logistic and artificial neural network (ANN) models were created using various strategies and trained and tested on bovine and rat precursors with experimental cleavage information. Multiple criteria were used to compare 4 logistic regression models with varying properties and 8 ANN with varying structures. All models had high specificity (>90%) and sensitivity ranged from 68% to 100%. ANN based on well-represented amino acid locations performed similarly or slightly worse than networks based on all amino acid locations. Logistic parameter estimates aided in the identification of amino acids associated with cleavage. No model was superior across data sets and thus, prediction of neuropeptides should rely on multiple model specifications and comprehensive training data sets.
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信