↓ Skip to main content

Multi-class computational evolution: development, benchmark evaluation and application to RNA-Seq biomarker discovery

Overview of attention for article published in BioData Mining, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 Mendeley
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
Multi-class computational evolution: development, benchmark evaluation and application to RNA-Seq biomarker discovery
Published in
BioData Mining, April 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13040-017-0134-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nathaniel M. Crabtree, Jason H. Moore, John F. Bowyer, Nysia I. George

Abstract

A computational evolution system (CES) is a knowledge discovery engine that can identify subtle, synergistic relationships in large datasets. Pareto optimization allows CESs to balance accuracy with model complexity when evolving classifiers. Using Pareto optimization, a CES is able to identify a very small number of features while maintaining high classification accuracy. A CES can be designed for various types of data, and the user can exploit expert knowledge about the classification problem in order to improve discrimination between classes. These characteristics give CES an advantage over other classification and feature selection algorithms, particularly when the goal is to identify a small number of highly relevant, non-redundant biomarkers. Previously, CESs have been developed only for binary class datasets. In this study, we developed a multi-class CES. The multi-class CES was compared to three common feature selection and classification algorithms: support vector machine (SVM), random k-nearest neighbor (RKNN), and random forest (RF). The algorithms were evaluated on three distinct multi-class RNA sequencing datasets. The comparison criteria were run-time, classification accuracy, number of selected features, and stability of selected feature set (as measured by the Tanimoto distance). The performance of each algorithm was data-dependent. CES performed best on the dataset with the smallest sample size, indicating that CES has a unique advantage since the accuracy of most classification methods suffer when sample size is small. The multi-class extension of CES increases the appeal of its application to complex, multi-class datasets in order to identify important biomarkers and features.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 18%
Researcher 3 14%
Student > Master 3 14%
Librarian 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 5 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 4 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 9%
Psychology 2 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 5%
Other 3 14%
Unknown 7 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 08 May 2017.
All research outputs
#4,494,035
of 24,022,746 outputs
Outputs from BioData Mining
#100
of 314 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#75,590
of 313,126 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BioData Mining
#5
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,022,746 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 314 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 313,126 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 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.