Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17646340›Full record

ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2007

Information theory applied to the sparse gene ontology annotation network to predict novel gene function.

Ying Tao, Lee Sam, Jianrong Li, Carol Friedman, Yves A Lussier

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 71 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
71citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

71 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. The effects of shared information on semantic calculations in the gene ontology.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2017
    Article

11 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Ying TaoDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, 622 West 168th Street, VC5, New York, NY 10032, USA.
Lee Sam
Jianrong Li
Carol Friedman
Yves A Lussier

Funding

Nation Center: Multi-Scale Study- Cellular Networks(RMI)U54CA121852 · NCI · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI CALIFANO, ANDREA · 2005 to 2015
$37.4M
A Biomedical Natural Language Processing ResourceR01LM008635 · NLM · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI FRIEDMAN, CAROL · 2005 to 2008
$2.1M
Capturing and linking genomic and clinical informationR01LM007659 · NLM · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI FRIEDMAN, CAROL · 2003 to 2006
$1.9M
Semantic Approaches to Phenotypic Databases AnalysesK22LM008308 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO · PI LUSSIER, YVES A · 2004 to 2006
$468k
NCI NIH HHS 1U54CA121852NCI NIH HHS U54 CA121852NLM NIH HHS K22 LM008308NLM NIH HHS K22LM008308NLM NIH HHS R01 LM007659NLM NIH HHS R01LM007659NLM NIH HHS R01 LM008635NLM NIH HHS R01LM008635
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

motivationDespite advances in the gene annotation process, the functions of a large portion of gene products remain insufficiently characterized. In addition, the in silico prediction of novel Gene Ontology (GO) annotations for partially characterized gene functions or processes is highly dependent on reverse genetic or functional genomic approaches. To our knowledge, no prediction method has been demonstrated to be highly accurate for sparsely annotated GO terms (those associated to fewer than 10 genes).

resultsWe propose a novel approach, information theory-based semantic similarity (ITSS), to automatically predict molecular functions of genes based on existing GO annotations. Using a 10-fold cross-validation, we demonstrate that the ITSS algorithm obtains prediction accuracies (precision 97%, recall 77%) comparable to other machine learning algorithms when compared in similar conditions over densely annotated portions of the GO datasets. This method is able to generate highly accurate predictions in sparsely annotated portions of GO, where previous algorithms have failed. As a result, our technique generates an order of magnitude more functional predictions than previous methods. A 10-fold cross validation demonstrated a precision of 90% at a recall of 36% for the algorithm over sparsely annotated networks of the recent GO annotations (about 1400 GO terms and 11,000 genes in Homo sapiens). To our knowledge, this article presents the first historical rollback validation for the predicted GO annotations, which may represent more realistic conditions than more widely used cross-validation approaches. By manually assessing a random sample of 100 predictions conducted in a historical rollback evaluation, we estimate that a minimum precision of 51% (95% confidence interval: 43-58%) can be achieved for the human GO Annotation file dated 2003. AVAILABILITY: The program is available on request. The 97,732 positive predictions of novel gene annotations from the 2005 GO Annotation dataset and other supplementary information is available at http://phenos.bsd.uchicago.edu/ITSS/. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsArtificial IntelligenceDatabases, ProteinTerminology as TopicComputational BiologyInformation TheoryProteinsStructure-Activity RelationshipProteins

Identifiers

PMID17646340
PMCPMC2882681

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.