Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37118768›Full record

ArticleJournal of cheminformatics2023

Large-scale evaluation of k-fold cross-validation ensembles for uncertainty estimation.

Thomas-Martin Dutschmann, Lennart Kinzel, Antonius Ter Laak, Knut Baumann

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cheminformatics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
12.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 62 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Thomas-Martin DutschmannInstitute of Medicinal and Pharmaceutical Chemistry, University of Technology Braunschweig, Beethovenstrasse 55, 38106, Brunswick, Germany.
Lennart KinzelInstitute of Medicinal and Pharmaceutical Chemistry, University of Technology Braunschweig, Beethovenstrasse 55, 38106, Brunswick, Germany.
Antonius Ter LaakBayer AG, Research & Development, Pharmaceuticals, Muellerstrasse 178, 13353, Berlin, Germany.
Knut BaumannInstitute of Medicinal and Pharmaceutical Chemistry, University of Technology Braunschweig, Beethovenstrasse 55, 38106, Brunswick, Germany. k.baumann@tu-braunschweig.de.
Technische Universität Braunschweig · DEBayer (Germany) · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

It is insightful to report an estimator that describes how certain a model is in a prediction, additionally to the prediction alone. For regression tasks, most approaches implement a variation of the ensemble method, apart from few exceptions. Instead of a single estimator, a group of estimators yields several predictions for an input. The uncertainty can then be quantified by measuring the disagreement between the predictions, for example by the standard deviation. In theory, ensembles should not only provide uncertainties, they also boost the predictive performance by reducing errors arising from variance. Despite the development of novel methods, they are still considered the "golden-standard" to quantify the uncertainty of regression models. Subsampling-based methods to obtain ensembles can be applied to all models, regardless whether they are related to deep learning or traditional machine learning. However, little attention has been given to the question whether the ensemble method is applicable to virtually all scenarios occurring in the field of cheminformatics. In a widespread and diversified attempt, ensembles are evaluated for 32 datasets of different sizes and modeling difficulty, ranging from physicochemical properties to biological activities. For increasing ensemble sizes with up to 200 members, the predictive performance as well as the applicability as uncertainty estimator are shown for all combinations of five modeling techniques and four molecular featurizations. Useful recommendations were derived for practitioners regarding the success and minimum size of ensembles, depending on whether predictive performance or uncertainty quantification is of more importance for the task at hand.

Indexed as

Cross-validationDeep learningEnsemble learningMachine learningUncertainty quantificationValidation

Identifiers

PMID37118768
PMCPMC10142532
OpenAlexW4367320374

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.