Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26008881›Full record

ArticleMolecular bioSystems2015

Classifying pairs with trees for supervised biological network inference.

Marie Schrynemackers, Louis Wehenkel, M Madan Babu, Pierre Geurts

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular bioSystems, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

4 authors.

Marie SchrynemackersDepartment of EE and CS & GIGA-R, University of Liège, Belgium. marie.schrynemackers@ulg.ac.be.
Louis Wehenkel
M Madan Babu
Pierre Geurts

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_U105185859
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Networks are ubiquitous in biology, and computational approaches have been largely investigated for their inference. In particular, supervised machine learning methods can be used to complete a partially known network by integrating various measurements. Two main supervised frameworks have been proposed: the local approach, which trains a separate model for each network node, and the global approach, which trains a single model over pairs of nodes. Here, we systematically investigate, theoretically and empirically, the exploitation of tree-based ensemble methods in the context of these two approaches for biological network inference. We first formalize the problem of network inference as a classification of pairs, unifying in the process homogeneous and bipartite graphs and discussing two main sampling schemes. We then present the global and the local approaches, extending the latter for the prediction of interactions between two unseen network nodes, and discuss their specializations to tree-based ensemble methods, highlighting their interpretability and drawing links with clustering techniques. Extensive computational experiments are carried out with these methods on various biological networks that clearly highlight that these methods are competitive with existing methods.

Indexed as

Machine LearningAlgorithmsArtificial IntelligenceComputational BiologyComputer SimulationSignal TransductionSystems Biology

Identifiers

PMID26008881
PMCPMC4601289

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.