MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Gene Selection Method for Microarray Data Classification Using Particle Swarm Optimization and Neighborhood Rough Set

2019· article· en· W2912168960 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Mingquan Ye, Weiwei Wang, Chuanwen Yao, Rong Fan, Peipei Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Bioinformatics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRough Sets and Fuzzy Logic
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Anhui ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaFederation for the Humanities and Social Sciences
KeywordsParticle swarm optimizationComputer scienceClassifier (UML)Data miningGene selectionFeature selectionRough setArtificial intelligenceSelection (genetic algorithm)Identification (biology)Microarray analysis techniquesPattern recognition (psychology)Machine learningGeneBiologyGene expressionGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Mining knowledge from microarray data is one of the popular research topics in biomedical informatics. Gene selection is a significant research trend in biomedical data mining, since the accuracy of tumor identification heavily relies on the genes biologically relevant to the identified problems. Objective: In order to select a small subset of informative genes from numerous genes for tumor identification, various computational intelligence methods were presented. However, due to the high data dimensions, small sample size, and the inherent noise available, many computational methods confront challenges in selecting small gene subset. Methods: In our study, we propose a novel algorithm PSONRS_KNN for gene selection based on the particle swarm optimization (PSO) algorithm along with the neighborhood rough set (NRS) reduction model and the K-nearest neighborhood (KNN) classifier. Results: First, the top-ranked candidate genes are obtained by the GainRatioAttributeEval preselection algorithm in WEKA. Then, the minimum possible meaningful set of genes is selected by combining PSO with NRS and KNN classifier. Conclusion: Experimental results on five microarray gene expression datasets demonstrate that the performance of the proposed method is better than existing state-of-the-art methods in terms of classification accuracy and the number of selected genes.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations10
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent BioinformaticsSame topicRough Sets and Fuzzy LogicFrench-language works237,207