ArticleBMC bioinformatics2016
The parameter sensitivity of random forests.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
39 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Using Machine Learning to Identify and Investigate Moderators of Alcohol Use Intervention Effects in Meta-Analyses.Alcohol and alcoholism (Oxford, Oxfordshire) · 2022Pooled it
- A machine-learning model for accurate diuresis prediction in acute heart failure (DRC-AHF).ESC heart failure · 2026Article
- Seasonal water quality index prediction in Guilin karst water system: an explainable machine learning approach.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Establishment and validation of a machine learning-based prediction model for sepsis-induced coagulopathy.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2026Article
- Predictive biomarkers of response to chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy for pan-haematologic cancer.Nature biomedical engineering · 2026Article
- Article
- Artificial Intelligence-Enhanced Multi-Algorithm R Shiny Application for Predictive Modeling and Analytics: Case Study of Alzheimer Disease Diagnostics.JMIR aging · 2025Article
- Machine learning in biological research: key algorithms, applications, and future directions.BMC biology · 2025Review
- Integrated Approach of Machine Learning and High-Throughput Screening to Identify Chemical Probe Candidates Targeting Aldehyde Dehydrogenases.ACS pharmacology & translational science · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence and systems biology analysis in stem cell research and therapeutics development.Stem cells translational medicine · 2025Review
- Developing a Prediction Model for Suicidality Among COVID-19 Patients in Korea Using Timely Data From the National Center for Disaster and Trauma.Journal of Korean medical science · 2025Article
- Bayesian Calibration of Stochastic Agent Based Model via Random Forest.Statistics in medicine · 2025Article
- Clinical Response Characteristics of Salivary Proteins in the Management Strategy of Diabetes-Associated Periodontitis.Journal of proteome research · 2025Article
- Estimation of elbow flexion torque from anthropometric and NMES MMG variables using random forest regression.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Dengue dynamics, predictions, and future increase under changing monsoon climate in India.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- A machine learning approach for modeling the occurrence of the major intermediate hosts for schistosomiasis in East Africa.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Learning Financial Networks with High-frequency Trade Data.Data science in science · 2023Article
- Theory and Practice of Integrating Machine Learning and Conventional Statistics in Medical Data Analysis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Pre-trauma predictors of severe psychiatric comorbidity 5 years following traumatic experiences.International journal of epidemiology · 2022Article
- Identifying driving factors of urban land expansion using Google Earth Engine and machine-learning approaches in Mentougou District, China.Scientific reports · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Random Forest (RF) algorithm for supervised machine learning is an ensemble learning method widely used in science and many other fields. Its popularity has been increasing, but relatively few studies address the parameter selection process: a critical step in model fitting. Due to numerous assertions regarding the performance reliability of the default parameters, many RF models are fit using these values. However there has not yet been a thorough examination of the parameter-sensitivity of RFs in computational genomic studies. We address this gap here.
resultsWe examined the effects of parameter selection on classification performance using the RF machine learning algorithm on two biological datasets with distinct p/n ratios: sequencing summary statistics (low p/n) and microarray-derived data (high p/n). Here, p, refers to the number of variables and, n, the number of samples. Our findings demonstrate that parameterization is highly correlated with prediction accuracy and variable importance measures (VIMs). Further, we demonstrate that different parameters are critical in tuning different datasets, and that parameter-optimization significantly enhances upon the default parameters.
conclusionsParameter performance demonstrated wide variability on both low and high p/n data. Therefore, there is significant benefit to be gained by model tuning RFs away from their default parameter settings.
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.