↓ Skip to main content

DNA Molecule Classification Using Feature Primitives

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Bioinformatics, September 2006
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
13 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
DNA Molecule Classification Using Feature Primitives
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, September 2006
DOI 10.1186/1471-2105-7-s2-s15
Pubmed ID
Authors

Raja Tanveer Iqbal, Matthew Landry, Stephen Winters-Hilt

Abstract

We present a novel strategy for classification of DNA molecules using measurements from an alpha-Hemolysin channel detector. The proposed approach provides excellent classification performance for five different DNA hairpins that differ in only one base-pair. For multi-class DNA classification problems, practitioners usually adopt approaches that use decision trees consisting of binary classifiers. Finding the best tree topology requires exploring all possible tree topologies and is computationally prohibitive. We propose a computational framework based on feature primitives that eliminates the need of a decision tree of binary classifiers. In the first phase, we generate a pool of weak features from nanopore blockade current measurements by using HMM analysis, principal component analysis and various wavelet filters. In the next phase, feature selection is performed using AdaBoost. AdaBoost provides an ensemble of weak learners of various types learned from feature primitives. We show that our technique, despite its inherent simplicity, provides a performance comparable to recent multi-class DNA molecule classification results. Unlike the approach presented by Winters-Hilt et al., where weaker data is dropped to obtain better classification, the proposed approach provides comparable classification accuracy without any need for rejection of weak data. A weakness of this approach, on the other hand, is the very "hands-on" tuning and feature selection that is required to obtain good generalization. Simply put, this method obtains a more informed set of features and provides better results for that reason. The strength of this approach appears to be in its ability to identify strong features, an area where further results are actively being sought.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 8%
Unknown 12 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 31%
Researcher 3 23%
Unspecified 2 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 8%
Other 1 8%
Unknown 1 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 23%
Unspecified 2 15%
Computer Science 2 15%
Chemistry 2 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 8%
Other 1 8%
Unknown 2 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 March 2017.
All research outputs
#5,791,756
of 22,961,203 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#2,152
of 7,306 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,553
of 67,705 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#4
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,961,203 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,306 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 67,705 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.