Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33430997›Full record

ArticleJournal of cheminformatics2020

Comparison and improvement of the predictability and interpretability with ensemble learning models in QSPR applications.

Chia-Hsiu Chen, Kenichi Tanaka, Masaaki Kotera, Kimito Funatsu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cheminformatics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing 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

26 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. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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.

Chia-Hsiu ChenDepartment of Chemical System Engineering, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8656, Japan.
Kenichi TanakaDepartment of Chemical System Engineering, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8656, Japan.
Masaaki KoteraDepartment of Chemical System Engineering, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8656, Japan.
Kimito FunatsuDepartment of Chemical System Engineering, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8656, Japan. funatsu@chemsys.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ensemble learning helps improve machine learning results by combining several models and allows the production of better predictive performance compared to a single model. It also benefits and accelerates the researches in quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) and quantitative structure-property relationship (QSPR). With the growing number of ensemble learning models such as random forest, the effectiveness of QSAR/QSPR will be limited by the machine's inability to interpret the predictions to researchers. In fact, many implementations of ensemble learning models are able to quantify the overall magnitude of each feature. For example, feature importance allows us to assess the relative importance of features and to interpret the predictions. However, different ensemble learning methods or implementations may lead to different feature selections for interpretation. In this paper, we compared the predictability and interpretability of four typical well-established ensemble learning models (Random forest, extreme randomized trees, adaptive boosting and gradient boosting) for regression and binary classification modeling tasks. Then, the blending methods were built by summarizing four different ensemble learning methods. The blending method led to better performance and a unification interpretation by summarizing individual predictions from different learning models. The important features of two case studies which gave us some valuable information to compound properties were discussed in detail in this report. QSPR modeling with interpretable machine learning techniques can move the chemical design forward to work more efficiently, confirm hypothesis and establish knowledge for better results.

Indexed as

BlendingDecision treeEnsemble learningExtremely randomized treesFluorescenceLiquid crystalQSPRQuantitative structure–propertyRandom forest

Identifiers

PMID33430997
PMCPMC7106596

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.