ArticleBMC bioinformatics2015
Computational algorithms to predict Gene Ontology annotations.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- DBSCAN applied to EHRs data from patients with glioblastoma clusters patients based on cytosolic Hsp70 protein, sex, and brain subventricular zone.BioData mining · 2026Article
- Finding Gene Associations by Text Mining and Annotating it with Gene Ontology.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2022Article
- USP11 degrades KLF4 via its deubiquitinase activity in liver diseases.Journal of cellular and molecular medicine · 2021Article
- Gene function finding through cross-organism ensemble learning.BioData mining · 2021Article
- Protein function prediction with gene ontology: from traditional to deep learning models.PeerJ · 2021Article
- Screening and identification of potential target genes in head and neck cancer using bioinformatics analysis.Oncology letters · 2019Article
- Supervised and Unsupervised End-to-End Deep Learning for Gene Ontology Classification of Neural In Situ Hybridization Images.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
- Computational prediction of diagnosis and feature selection on mesothelioma patient health records.PloS one · 2019Article
- Supervised deep learning embeddings for the prediction of cervical cancer diagnosis.PeerJ. Computer science · 2018Article
- Ten quick tips for machine learning in computational biology.BioData mining · 2017Review
- Finding an appropriate equation to measure similarity between binary vectors: case studies on Indonesian and Japanese herbal medicines.BMC bioinformatics · 2016Article
- FlyOde - a platform for community curation and interactive visualization of dynamic gene regulatory networks in Drosophila eye development.F1000Research · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGene function annotations, which are associations between a gene and a term of a controlled vocabulary describing gene functional features, are of paramount importance in modern biology. Datasets of these annotations, such as the ones provided by the Gene Ontology Consortium, are used to design novel biological experiments and interpret their results. Despite their importance, these sources of information have some known issues. They are incomplete, since biological knowledge is far from being definitive and it rapidly evolves, and some erroneous annotations may be present. Since the curation process of novel annotations is a costly procedure, both in economical and time terms, computational tools that can reliably predict likely annotations, and thus quicken the discovery of new gene annotations, are very useful.
methodsWe used a set of computational algorithms and weighting schemes to infer novel gene annotations from a set of known ones. We used the latent semantic analysis approach, implementing two popular algorithms (Latent Semantic Indexing and Probabilistic Latent Semantic Analysis) and propose a novel method, the Semantic IMproved Latent Semantic Analysis, which adds a clustering step on the set of considered genes. Furthermore, we propose the improvement of these algorithms by weighting the annotations in the input set.
resultsWe tested our methods and their weighted variants on the Gene Ontology annotation sets of three model organism genes (Bos taurus, Danio rerio and Drosophila melanogaster ). The methods showed their ability in predicting novel gene annotations and the weighting procedures demonstrated to lead to a valuable improvement, although the obtained results vary according to the dimension of the input annotation set and the considered algorithm.
conclusionsOut of the three considered methods, the Semantic IMproved Latent Semantic Analysis is the one that provides better results. In particular, when coupled with a proper weighting policy, it is able to predict a significant number of novel annotations, demonstrating to actually be a helpful tool in supporting scientists in the curation process of gene functional annotations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.