MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2159605359 · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/bti483

Ensemble dependence model for classification and prediction of cancer and normal gene expression data

2005· article· en· W2159605359 on OpenAlexaff
Peng Qiu, Z.J. Wang, K. J. R. Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer applications in the biosciences · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGene expression and cancer classification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceEnsemble forecastingEnsemble learningComputational biologyCancerExpression (computer science)GeneGene expressionArtificial intelligenceGeneticsBiologyProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MOTIVATION: DNA microarray technologies make it possible to simultaneously monitor thousands of genes' expression levels. A topic of great interest is to study the different expression profiles between microarray samples from cancer patients and normal subjects, by classifying them at gene expression levels. Currently, various clustering methods have been proposed in the literature to classify cancer and normal samples based on microarray data, and they are predominantly data-driven approaches. In this paper, we propose an alternative approach, a model-driven approach, which can reveal the relationship between the global gene expression profile and the subject's health status, and thus is promising in predicting the early development of cancer. RESULTS: In this work, we propose an ensemble dependence model, aimed at exploring the group dependence relationship of gene clusters. Under the framework of hypothesis-testing, we employ genes' dependence relationship as a feature to model and classify cancer and normal samples. The proposed classification scheme is applied to several real cancer datasets, including cDNA, Affymetrix microarray and proteomic data. It is noted that the proposed method yields very promising performance. We further investigate the eigenvalue pattern of the proposed method, and we discover different patterns between cancer and normal samples. Moreover, the transition between cancer and normal patterns suggests that the eigenvalue pattern of the proposed models may have potential to predict the early stage of cancer development. In addition, we examine the effects of possible model mismatch on the proposed scheme.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.062
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.263 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations39
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputer applications in the biosciencesSame topicGene expression and cancer classificationFrench-language works237,207