Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28040499›Full record

ArticleJournal of biomedical informatics2017

Machine-learned cluster identification in high-dimensional data.

Alfred Ultsch, Jörn Lötsch

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of biomedical informatics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing 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

29 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

2 authors.

Alfred UltschDataBionics Research Group, University of Marburg, Hans-Meerwein-Straβe, 35032 Marburg, Germany.
Jörn LötschInstitute of Clinical Pharmacology, Goethe-University, Theodor Stern Kai 7, 60590 Frankfurt am Main, Germany; Fraunhofer Institute of Molecular Biology and Applied Ecology-Project Group Translational Medicine and Pharmacology (IME-TMP), Theodor-Stern-Kai 7, 60590 Frankfurt am Main, Germany. Electronic address: j.loetsch@em.uni-frankfurt.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHigh-dimensional biomedical data are frequently clustered to identify subgroup structures pointing at distinct disease subtypes. It is crucial that the used cluster algorithm works correctly. However, by imposing a predefined shape on the clusters, classical algorithms occasionally suggest a cluster structure in homogenously distributed data or assign data points to incorrect clusters. We analyzed whether this can be avoided by using emergent self-organizing feature maps (ESOM).

methodsData sets with different degrees of complexity were submitted to ESOM analysis with large numbers of neurons, using an interactive R-based bioinformatics tool. On top of the trained ESOM the distance structure in the high dimensional feature space was visualized in the form of a so-called U-matrix. Clustering results were compared with those provided by classical common cluster algorithms including single linkage, Ward and k-means.

resultsWard clustering imposed cluster structures on cluster-less "golf ball", "cuboid" and "S-shaped" data sets that contained no structure at all (random data). Ward clustering also imposed structures on permuted real world data sets. By contrast, the ESOM/U-matrix approach correctly found that these data contain no cluster structure. However, ESOM/U-matrix was correct in identifying clusters in biomedical data truly containing subgroups. It was always correct in cluster structure identification in further canonical artificial data. Using intentionally simple data sets, it is shown that popular clustering algorithms typically used for biomedical data sets may fail to cluster data correctly, suggesting that they are also likely to perform erroneously on high dimensional biomedical data.

conclusionsThe present analyses emphasized that generally established classical hierarchical clustering algorithms carry a considerable tendency to produce erroneous results. By contrast, unsupervised machine-learned analysis of cluster structures, applied using the ESOM/U-matrix method, is a viable, unbiased method to identify true clusters in the high-dimensional space of complex data.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsCluster AnalysisMachine LearningComputational BiologyClusteringMachine-learning

Identifiers

PMID28040499
PMCPMC5313598

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.