MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3012154856 · doi:10.1186/s12859-020-3426-9

PESM: predicting the essentiality of miRNAs based on gradient boosting machines and sequences

2020· article· en· W3012154856 on OpenAlexaff
Cheng Yan, Fang‐Xiang Wu, Jianxin Wang, Guihua Duan

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Bioinformatics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMicroRNA in disease regulation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsBoosting (machine learning)Support vector machineComputer scienceBayes' theoremmicroRNAMachine learningGradient boostingNaive Bayes classifierArtificial intelligenceComputational biologyDNA microarrayData miningBiologyBayesian probabilityRandom forestGeneGeneticsGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are a kind of small noncoding RNA molecules that are direct posttranscriptional regulations of mRNA targets. Studies have indicated that miRNAs play key roles in complex diseases by taking part in many biological processes, such as cell growth, cell death and so on. Therefore, in order to improve the effectiveness of disease diagnosis and treatment, it is appealing to develop advanced computational methods for predicting the essentiality of miRNAs. RESULT: In this study, we propose a method (PESM) to predict the miRNA essentiality based on gradient boosting machines and miRNA sequences. First, PESM extracts the sequence and structural features of miRNAs. Then it uses gradient boosting machines to predict the essentiality of miRNAs. We conduct the 5-fold cross-validation to assess the prediction performance of our method. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), F-measure and accuracy (ACC) are used as the metrics to evaluate the prediction performance. We also compare PESM with other three competing methods which include miES, Gaussian Naive Bayes and Support Vector Machine. CONCLUSION: The results of experiments show that PESM achieves the better prediction performance (AUC: 0.9117, F-measure: 0.8572, ACC: 0.8516) than other three computing methods. In addition, the relative importance of all features also further shows that newly added features can be helpful to improve the prediction performance of methods.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.865
Threshold uncertainty score0.246

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

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

Citations15
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC BioinformaticsSame topicMicroRNA in disease regulationFrench-language works237,207