Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34770921›Full record

ArticleMolecules (Basel, Switzerland)2021

Evaluating High-Variance Leaves as Uncertainty Measure for Random Forest Regression.

Thomas-Martin Dutschmann, Knut Baumann

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Molecules (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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.

Thomas-Martin DutschmannInstitute for Medicinal and Pharmaceutical Chemistry, University of Technology Braunschweig, Beethovenstraße 55, 38106 Braunschweig, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-5880-3517
Knut BaumannInstitute for Medicinal and Pharmaceutical Chemistry, University of Technology Braunschweig, Beethovenstraße 55, 38106 Braunschweig, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-9459-0045

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Uncertainty measures estimate the reliability of a predictive model. Especially in the field of molecular property prediction as part of drug design, model reliability is crucial. Besides other techniques, Random Forests have a long tradition in machine learning related to chemoinformatics and are widely used. Random Forests consist of an ensemble of individual regression models, namely, decision trees and, therefore, provide an uncertainty measure already by construction. Regarding the disagreement of single-model predictions, a narrower distribution of predictions is interpreted as a higher reliability. The standard deviation of the decision tree ensemble predictions is the default uncertainty measure for Random Forests. Due to the increasing application of machine learning in drug design, there is a constant search for novel uncertainty measures that, ideally, outperform classical uncertainty criteria. When analyzing Random Forests, it appears obvious to consider the variance of the dependent variables within each terminal decision tree leaf to obtain predictive uncertainties. Hereby, predictions that arise from more leaves of high variance are considered less reliable. Expectedly, the number of such high-variance leaves yields a reasonable uncertainty measure. Depending on the dataset, it can also outperform ensemble uncertainties. However, small-scale comparisons, i.e., considering only a few datasets, are insufficient, since they are more prone to chance correlations. Therefore, large-scale estimations are required to make general claims about the performance of uncertainty measures. On several chemoinformatic regression datasets, high-variance leaves are compared to the standard deviation of ensemble predictions. It turns out that high-variance leaf uncertainty is meaningful, not superior to the default ensemble standard deviation. A brief possible explanation is offered.

Indexed as

chemoinformaticsensemblemachine learningRandom Forestregressionreliability measureuncertainty measure

Identifiers

PMID34770921
PMCPMC8588039

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.