Decision of the Optimal Rank of a Nonnegative Matrix Factorization Model for Gene Expression Data Sets Utilizing the Unit Invariant Knee Method: Development and Evaluation of the Elbow Method for Rank Selection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is a great need to develop a computational approach to analyze and exploit the information contained in gene expression data. The recent utilization of nonnegative matrix factorization (NMF) in computational biology has demonstrated the capability to derive essential details from a high amount of data in particular gene expression microarrays. A common problem in NMF is finding the proper number rank (r) of factors of the degraded demonstration, but no agreement exists on which technique is most appropriate to utilize for this purpose. Thus, various techniques have been suggested to select the optimal value of rank factorization (r). OBJECTIVE: In this work, a new metric for rank selection is proposed based on the elbow method, which was methodically compared against the cophenetic metric. METHODS: To decide the optimum number rank (r), this study focused on the unit invariant knee (UIK) method of the NMF on gene expression data sets. Since the UIK method requires an extremum distance estimator that is eventually employed for inflection and identification of a knee point, the proposed method finds the first inflection point of the curvature of the residual sum of squares of the proposed algorithms using the UIK method on gene expression data sets as a target matrix. RESULTS: Computation was conducted for the UIK task using gene expression data of acute lymphoblastic leukemia and acute myeloid leukemia samples. Consequently, the distinct results of NMF were subjected to comparison on different algorithms. The proposed UIK method is easy to perform, fast, free of a priori rank value input, and does not require initial parameters that significantly influence the model's functionality. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that the elbow method provides a credible prediction for both gene expression data and for precisely estimating simulated mutational processes data with known dimensions. The proposed UIK method is faster than conventional methods, including metrics utilizing the consensus matrix as a criterion for rank selection, while achieving significantly better computational efficiency without visual inspection on the curvatives. Finally, the suggested rank tuning method based on the elbow method for gene expression data is arguably theoretically superior to the cophenetic measure.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".