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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Assessing statistical significance in causal graphs
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Bioinformatics, February 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2105-13-35 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Leonid Chindelevitch, Po-Ru Loh, Ahmed Enayetallah, Bonnie Berger, Daniel Ziemek |
| Abstract |
Causal graphs are an increasingly popular tool for the analysis of biological datasets. In particular, signed causal graphs--directed graphs whose edges additionally have a sign denoting upregulation or downregulation--can be used to model regulatory networks within a cell. Such models allow prediction of downstream effects of regulation of biological entities; conversely, they also enable inference of causative agents behind observed expression changes. However, due to their complex nature, signed causal graph models present special challenges with respect to assessing statistical significance. In this paper we frame and solve two fundamental computational problems that arise in practice when computing appropriate null distributions for hypothesis testing. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 71% |
| Germany | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 1 | 14% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 2 | 2% |
| United States | 2 | 2% |
| Germany | 1 | 1% |
| Sweden | 1 | 1% |
| Hong Kong | 1 | 1% |
| Russia | 1 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 79 | 90% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 30 | 34% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 23 | 26% |
| Professor | 10 | 11% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 7 | 8% |
| Other | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 9 | 10% |
| Unknown | 3 | 3% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 34 | 39% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 15 | 17% |
| Computer Science | 14 | 16% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 5% |
| Mathematics | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 13 | 15% |
| Unknown | 4 | 5% |
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 21 April 2012.
All research outputs
#5,614,178
of 22,663,150 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#2,085
of 7,242 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,146
of 156,574 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#15
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,663,150 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,242 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 156,574 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 66 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.