↓ Skip to main content

Improving the measurement of semantic similarity by combining gene ontology and co-functional network: a random walk based approach

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Systems Biology, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Readers on

mendeley
37 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
Improving the measurement of semantic similarity by combining gene ontology and co-functional network: a random walk based approach
Published in
BMC Systems Biology, March 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12918-018-0539-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jiajie Peng, Xuanshuo Zhang, Weiwei Hui, Junya Lu, Qianqian Li, Shuhui Liu, Xuequn Shang

Abstract

Gene Ontology (GO) is one of the most popular bioinformatics resources. In the past decade, Gene Ontology-based gene semantic similarity has been effectively used to model gene-to-gene interactions in multiple research areas. However, most existing semantic similarity approaches rely only on GO annotations and structure, or incorporate only local interactions in the co-functional network. This may lead to inaccurate GO-based similarity resulting from the incomplete GO topology structure and gene annotations. We present NETSIM2, a new network-based method that allows researchers to measure GO-based gene functional similarities by considering the global structure of the co-functional network with a random walk with restart (RWR)-based method, and by selecting the significant term pairs to decrease the noise information. Based on the EC number (Enzyme Commission)-based groups of yeast and Arabidopsis, evaluation test shows that NETSIM2 can enhance the accuracy of Gene Ontology-based gene functional similarity. Using NETSIM2 as an example, we found that the accuracy of semantic similarities can be significantly improved after effectively incorporating the global gene-to-gene interactions in the co-functional network, especially on the species that gene annotations in GO are far from complete.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 37 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 7 19%
Student > Master 6 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 11%
Researcher 3 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 8%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 11 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 19%
Computer Science 7 19%
Engineering 4 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 8%
Chemical Engineering 2 5%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 11 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 2018.
All research outputs
#14,970,944
of 23,028,364 outputs
Outputs from BMC Systems Biology
#603
of 1,144 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#200,960
of 332,288 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Systems Biology
#16
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,028,364 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,144 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 332,288 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.