4.7 Article

Classifying short gene expression time-courses with Bayesian estimation of piecewise constant functions

期刊

BIOINFORMATICS
卷 27, 期 7, 页码 946-952

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btr037

关键词

-

资金

  1. Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa de Pernambuco
  2. Conselho de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico (Brazil)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Motivation: Analyzing short time-courses is a frequent and relevant problem in molecular biology, as, for example, 90% of gene expression time-course experiments span at most nine time-points. The biological or clinical questions addressed are elucidating gene regulation by identification of co-expressed genes, predicting response to treatment in clinical, trial-like settings or classifying novel toxic compounds based on similarity of gene expression time-courses to those of known toxic compounds. The latter problem is characterized by irregular and infrequent sample times and a total lack of prior assumptions about the incoming query, which comes in stark contrast to clinical settings and requires to implicitly perform a local, gapped alignment of time series. The current state-of-the-art method (SCOW) uses a variant of dynamic time warping and models time series as higher order polynomials (splines). Results: We suggest to model time-courses monitoring response to toxins by piecewise constant functions, which are modeled as left-right Hidden Markov Models. A Bayesian approach to parameter estimation and inference helps to cope with the short, but highly multivariate time-courses. We improve prediction accuracy by 7% and 4%, respectively, when classifying toxicology and stress response data. We also reduce running times by at least a factor of 140; note that reasonable running times are crucial when classifying response to toxins. In conclusion, we have demonstrated that appropriate reduction of model complexity can result in substantial improvements both in classification performance and running time.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据