↓ Skip to main content

Spatially Uniform ReliefF (SURF) for computationally-efficient filtering of gene-gene interactions

Overview of attention for article published in BioData Mining, September 2009
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
134 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
91 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
Spatially Uniform ReliefF (SURF) for computationally-efficient filtering of gene-gene interactions
Published in
BioData Mining, September 2009
DOI 10.1186/1756-0381-2-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Casey S Greene, Nadia M Penrod, Jeff Kiralis, Jason H Moore

Abstract

Genome-wide association studies are becoming the de facto standard in the genetic analysis of common human diseases. Given the complexity and robustness of biological networks such diseases are unlikely to be the result of single points of failure but instead likely arise from the joint failure of two or more interacting components. The hope in genome-wide screens is that these points of failure can be linked to single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) which confer disease susceptibility. Detecting interacting variants that lead to disease in the absence of single-gene effects is difficult however, and methods to exhaustively analyze sets of these variants for interactions are combinatorial in nature thus making them computationally infeasible. Efficient algorithms which can detect interacting SNPs are needed. ReliefF is one such promising algorithm, although it has low success rate for noisy datasets when the interaction effect is small. ReliefF has been paired with an iterative approach, Tuned ReliefF (TuRF), which improves the estimation of weights in noisy data but does not fundamentally change the underlying ReliefF algorithm. To improve the sensitivity of studies using these methods to detect small effects we introduce Spatially Uniform ReliefF (SURF).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 4%
Denmark 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Australia 1 1%
Unknown 84 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 33%
Student > Master 17 19%
Researcher 11 12%
Student > Bachelor 8 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 5%
Other 12 13%
Unknown 8 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 24 26%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 21 23%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 7%
Mathematics 4 4%
Other 13 14%
Unknown 10 11%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 05 April 2018.
All research outputs
#3,828,890
of 23,314,015 outputs
Outputs from BioData Mining
#88
of 313 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,938
of 94,169 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BioData Mining
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,314,015 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 313 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 94,169 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them